I predict Biden will criticize Israel for bombing the AP building in Gaza.

[healthmyths]

You people are remarkably forgiving of the only other country in the world that can make the decision that America will go to war.

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…​

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…

UPDATE “After Operation Protective Edge in 2014, former AP reporter Matti Friedman wrote in The Atlantic: “Hamas understood that reporters could be intimidated when necessary and that they w…

citizenfreepress.com

Just wait... Biden and his infidel believers will criticize Israel just as

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building​

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli air strike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.
Reporters for AP and Al Jazeera were forced to evacuate the 12-story building after the owner was warned that it would be targeted. Israeli forces struck the building an hour later, causing it to completely collapse.

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli airstrike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.AP President and CEO Gary Pruit…

thehill.com

By the way... has Hamas given anyone warnings about these attacks?

IMRA - Sunday, April 18, 2004 A Chronology of Terrorist Attacks Carried out by Hamas Since September 2000

www.imra.org.il

Well, the Israelis have done this sort of stuff for 70 years.

You mean attack their enemies? That's why we admire them.

Israelis attacked the worshippers at AlAqsa.. They engineered this fight so they could kill more Palestinians.

No, they didn't. More propaganda. Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque. The western narrative is a joke. Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets. Hamas needs to be annihilated.

Right proof

Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque.... Proof...

Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets.... Prove that Hamas actually did this and it wasn't Jihad...

Wrong.
There is no proof of any weapons from mosques, schools, hospitals, or any other questionable source.
The recent rockets were more than justified retaliation over the recent murder and land confiscations.

Sorry don't believe anything you write! NO substantiation! NO LINKS! ONLY your subjective and personalized opinion!

Liar.
I have quoted and linked more than anyone else on this board.
I am also right.

Right there! If you did you'd provide the numbers and links! Where is THAT proof of your statement? You proved the point ...AGAIN!!!
Total liar when you say that! Prove it!

 

[Rigby5]

Bullshit

Learn to deal with facts and not expect media to be sycophants to your bias.

Instead they should be shills for your favorite ideologies? That's not how I see things.
Do you miss Pravda?

So, in your mind if the media isn't shilling for you bias it's shilling for someone else? s reporting of events and news ever not biased your sycophant's mind?

We know the media shills for the left and Muslim terrorists.

How can Muslims be "terrorists" when they are just defending their homelands?

Israel is not their homeland, moron.

WRONG!
Go read some history books.
Hebrew did not come from Palestine, but the Sinai.
Why do you think they went to Egypt for 400 years to escape a drought in the Sinai, if they came from Palestine, which never had a drought like that.
And why is it Palestine then was known of the Land of Canaan if it was the homeland of the Hebrew?
The Hebrew did invade around 1000 BC, but only ruled for a couple hundred years before being defeated and driven out by the Babylonians. They kept sneaking back, but were later defeated and driven out again and again, by the Assyrians and finally the Romans
The Hebrew never belonged there and were always illegal, brutal, invaders.
And they again were illegal foreign invaders in 1948.
They do not belong there.
It is NOT their homeland and never was.

Counter argument since YOU OFFERED NO LINKS...JUST your guesses.
Why is it so difficult to provide sources? As a result I assume you are guessing!

Israel's international "birth certificate" was validated by the promise of the Bible; uninterrupted Jewish settlement from the time of Joshua onward; the Balfour Declaration of 1917; the League of Nations Mandate, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration; the United Nations partition resolution of 1947; Israel's admission to the UN in 1949; the recognition of Israel by most other states; and, most of all, the society created by Israel's people in decades of thriving, dynamic national existence.​

Jewish Claim To The Land Of Israel

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

That is easy to prove is lies.

First of all, lets establish that Joshua was a brutal invader who massacred the native Canaanite in Jerusalem, around 1000 BC.
Then lets prove the claim of uninterrupted Jewish settlement is a lie.
Did not the the Assyrians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 701 BC?
Did not the the Babylonians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 587 BC?
Did not the the Romans defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 70 AD?
Did not the Crusaders massacre any remaining Jews from 1099 on?

As for the Balfour Declaration, England did not own Palestine at the time, so was invalid.
But it never intended or gave any hint of Jewish ownership, only facilitated immigration.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

And as for who does own Palestine, I suggest you refer to the Treaty of San Remo and Treaty of Sevres, which legally created the Moslem Palestine as agreed by the British for helping the Allies in WWI.
The British Mandate for Palestine was not a whim, but a contractual obligation to the Arab Moslems.

And finally, the hundreds of war crime resolution by the UN against Israel invalidate it utterly.
There has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel.

Where are you FACTS supporting your personal opinion such as "there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...

Question for you:
Would you consider a country that committed the following as more criminally than Israel?

Indeed, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the literary giant who wrote harrowingly about the Soviet gulag system, claimed the true number of Stalin’s victims might have been as high as 60 million.

How Many People Did Joseph Stalin Kill?

Most reputed scholars and historians estimate that the number of people Stalin killed ranges from between 20 and 60 million.

www.ibtimes.com

Or how about this country:
From 1958 to 1962, his Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of up to 45 million people – easily making it the biggest episode of mass murder ever recorded.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/08/03/giving-historys-greatest-mass-murderer-his-due/

Now why should ANY ONE believe anything you write because right with this stupidly ignorant statement you show that anything you write is totally biased. Totally ignorant. AND truly unsubstantiated.
Compared to 100 million killed by Stalin/Mao i.e Communists which evidently (YOU ARE)... where do you get off on saying ""there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...
Don't you see that anyone who reads that and knows history will say that guy is crazy!

This asshole believes "Palestine" is a real country but Israel isn't.

The natives are Palestinian, while the Zionists are all illegal immigrants, mostly from Poland and Russia.
Palestine was made in 1920 by world treaty and legal obligation.
Israel was created essentially by Truman's unilateral fiat in 1949.

There's no such country as Palestine, and the people who claim they are Palestinian are almost entirely from somewhere else.

That makes no sense.
Palestine, (AKA the Land of Canaan, the Levant, etc.,) is always described as the most popular and densely populated in the entire Mideast.
The Oranges of Jaffa were world famous in the 1800s.
In 1922 the census says 3/4 of a million Palestinians, with only 4% being Jewish.
(It actually would have been higher total, but WWI and disease brought it down.)
So then how could 3/4 of a million Palestinian, mostly Moslem, not be a Palestine in 1922?
Especially since Palestine had just been legally mandated by treaty in 1920?

Canaan is one thing, and Palestine was another. The later was a creation of the United Nations. It wasn't a country.

You wouldn't ask questions like you did if you had simply read the facts. There has never been a country called Palestine. The territory the UN put Britain in charge of was divided up into Israel and Jordan. The so-called "Palestinians" are actually Jordanians.

Wrong.
Palestine was created by the League of Nations, the Treaty of San Remo, the Treaty of Sevres, and the Allies from WWI, in 1920.
That was before the UN was created in 1945.
The UN had nothing to do with creating Palestine in 1920.

The British were mandated only to create an Arab Palestine, and there is no legal basis for Israel.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...
Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

Your article only supports what I've been saying.

No it does not.
It says that Palestine is to be Arab and Moslem, but that Jews are to be allowed immigration as long as they stay below the limit.
There is never to be a Jewish state.

Wrong, idiot:

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.'​

A Jewish home means facilitated immigration.
It does not mean a state religion.
It clearly says the home for Jews would be within the greater Arab Moslem Palestine.
Which at this time was 95% Arab Moslem..

Read the next sentence:
{,,, It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government. ...}
The Jews were only being granted such liberal immigration because they had vowed to have no part in the government of Palestine.
There was to be no Israel.
The Jews were lying and always intended to steal all of Palestine.

Spare us. I've had enough of your weaseling about delusional Palestinians and their imaginary homeland.

Wrong.
I have well documented the proof of Palestine's legal creation in 1920.

No nation called Palestine was created in 1920, moron.

Oh, then why were the British given the British Mandate for Palestine in 1920?
A mandate means the British were to train the Palestine government to be able to survive on its own, with independence.

But wait, you said Palestine became a nation in 1920. You sound very confused.

YES!
Palestine officially existed in boundary and definition as a sovereign entity in 1920.
But it did not yet have a government.
That is why the British were mandated to protect and train the Palestinians until they could defend themselves.

No it didn't. How could it be "sovereign" when the British government made the law there?

Same thing when any country is liberated during a war and its invader removed.
Temporarily a military commission rules.
But that does not alter the sovereign entity and rights, it just means its civilian government has not yet been prepared to take back over.

 

[Rigby5]

You people are remarkably forgiving of the only other country in the world that can make the decision that America will go to war.

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…​

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…

UPDATE “After Operation Protective Edge in 2014, former AP reporter Matti Friedman wrote in The Atlantic: “Hamas understood that reporters could be intimidated when necessary and that they w…

citizenfreepress.com

Just wait... Biden and his infidel believers will criticize Israel just as

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building​

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli air strike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.
Reporters for AP and Al Jazeera were forced to evacuate the 12-story building after the owner was warned that it would be targeted. Israeli forces struck the building an hour later, causing it to completely collapse.

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli airstrike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.AP President and CEO Gary Pruit…

thehill.com

By the way... has Hamas given anyone warnings about these attacks?

IMRA - Sunday, April 18, 2004 A Chronology of Terrorist Attacks Carried out by Hamas Since September 2000

www.imra.org.il

Well, the Israelis have done this sort of stuff for 70 years.

You mean attack their enemies? That's why we admire them.

Israelis attacked the worshippers at AlAqsa.. They engineered this fight so they could kill more Palestinians.

No, they didn't. More propaganda. Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque. The western narrative is a joke. Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets. Hamas needs to be annihilated.

Right proof

Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque.... Proof...

Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets.... Prove that Hamas actually did this and it wasn't Jihad...

Wrong.
There is no proof of any weapons from mosques, schools, hospitals, or any other questionable source.
The recent rockets were more than justified retaliation over the recent murder and land confiscations.

Sorry don't believe anything you write! NO substantiation! NO LINKS! ONLY your subjective and personalized opinion!

Liar.
I have quoted and linked more than anyone else on this board.
I am also right.

Right there! If you did you'd provide the numbers and links! Where is THAT proof of your statement? You proved the point ...AGAIN!!!
Total liar when you say that! Prove it!

Prove what?
You claim some sort of Hamas war crime, but there is no Hamas war crime.
Retaliation with rockets is perfectly legal when Israel murders, arrests, and confiscates.
Israel has no right to any of the West Bank.

 

[bripat9643]

Bullshit

Learn to deal with facts and not expect media to be sycophants to your bias.

Instead they should be shills for your favorite ideologies? That's not how I see things.
Do you miss Pravda?

So, in your mind if the media isn't shilling for you bias it's shilling for someone else? s reporting of events and news ever not biased your sycophant's mind?

We know the media shills for the left and Muslim terrorists.

How can Muslims be "terrorists" when they are just defending their homelands?

Israel is not their homeland, moron.

WRONG!
Go read some history books.
Hebrew did not come from Palestine, but the Sinai.
Why do you think they went to Egypt for 400 years to escape a drought in the Sinai, if they came from Palestine, which never had a drought like that.
And why is it Palestine then was known of the Land of Canaan if it was the homeland of the Hebrew?
The Hebrew did invade around 1000 BC, but only ruled for a couple hundred years before being defeated and driven out by the Babylonians. They kept sneaking back, but were later defeated and driven out again and again, by the Assyrians and finally the Romans
The Hebrew never belonged there and were always illegal, brutal, invaders.
And they again were illegal foreign invaders in 1948.
They do not belong there.
It is NOT their homeland and never was.

Counter argument since YOU OFFERED NO LINKS...JUST your guesses.
Why is it so difficult to provide sources? As a result I assume you are guessing!

Israel's international "birth certificate" was validated by the promise of the Bible; uninterrupted Jewish settlement from the time of Joshua onward; the Balfour Declaration of 1917; the League of Nations Mandate, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration; the United Nations partition resolution of 1947; Israel's admission to the UN in 1949; the recognition of Israel by most other states; and, most of all, the society created by Israel's people in decades of thriving, dynamic national existence.​

Jewish Claim To The Land Of Israel

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

That is easy to prove is lies.

First of all, lets establish that Joshua was a brutal invader who massacred the native Canaanite in Jerusalem, around 1000 BC.
Then lets prove the claim of uninterrupted Jewish settlement is a lie.
Did not the the Assyrians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 701 BC?
Did not the the Babylonians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 587 BC?
Did not the the Romans defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 70 AD?
Did not the Crusaders massacre any remaining Jews from 1099 on?

As for the Balfour Declaration, England did not own Palestine at the time, so was invalid.
But it never intended or gave any hint of Jewish ownership, only facilitated immigration.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

And as for who does own Palestine, I suggest you refer to the Treaty of San Remo and Treaty of Sevres, which legally created the Moslem Palestine as agreed by the British for helping the Allies in WWI.
The British Mandate for Palestine was not a whim, but a contractual obligation to the Arab Moslems.

And finally, the hundreds of war crime resolution by the UN against Israel invalidate it utterly.
There has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel.

Where are you FACTS supporting your personal opinion such as "there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...

Question for you:
Would you consider a country that committed the following as more criminally than Israel?

Indeed, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the literary giant who wrote harrowingly about the Soviet gulag system, claimed the true number of Stalin’s victims might have been as high as 60 million.

How Many People Did Joseph Stalin Kill?

Most reputed scholars and historians estimate that the number of people Stalin killed ranges from between 20 and 60 million.

www.ibtimes.com

Or how about this country:
From 1958 to 1962, his Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of up to 45 million people – easily making it the biggest episode of mass murder ever recorded.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/08/03/giving-historys-greatest-mass-murderer-his-due/

Now why should ANY ONE believe anything you write because right with this stupidly ignorant statement you show that anything you write is totally biased. Totally ignorant. AND truly unsubstantiated.
Compared to 100 million killed by Stalin/Mao i.e Communists which evidently (YOU ARE)... where do you get off on saying ""there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...
Don't you see that anyone who reads that and knows history will say that guy is crazy!

This asshole believes "Palestine" is a real country but Israel isn't.

The natives are Palestinian, while the Zionists are all illegal immigrants, mostly from Poland and Russia.
Palestine was made in 1920 by world treaty and legal obligation.
Israel was created essentially by Truman's unilateral fiat in 1949.

There's no such country as Palestine, and the people who claim they are Palestinian are almost entirely from somewhere else.

That makes no sense.
Palestine, (AKA the Land of Canaan, the Levant, etc.,) is always described as the most popular and densely populated in the entire Mideast.
The Oranges of Jaffa were world famous in the 1800s.
In 1922 the census says 3/4 of a million Palestinians, with only 4% being Jewish.
(It actually would have been higher total, but WWI and disease brought it down.)
So then how could 3/4 of a million Palestinian, mostly Moslem, not be a Palestine in 1922?
Especially since Palestine had just been legally mandated by treaty in 1920?

Canaan is one thing, and Palestine was another. The later was a creation of the United Nations. It wasn't a country.

You wouldn't ask questions like you did if you had simply read the facts. There has never been a country called Palestine. The territory the UN put Britain in charge of was divided up into Israel and Jordan. The so-called "Palestinians" are actually Jordanians.

Wrong.
Palestine was created by the League of Nations, the Treaty of San Remo, the Treaty of Sevres, and the Allies from WWI, in 1920.
That was before the UN was created in 1945.
The UN had nothing to do with creating Palestine in 1920.

The British were mandated only to create an Arab Palestine, and there is no legal basis for Israel.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...
Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

Your article only supports what I've been saying.

No it does not.
It says that Palestine is to be Arab and Moslem, but that Jews are to be allowed immigration as long as they stay below the limit.
There is never to be a Jewish state.

Wrong, idiot:

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.'​

A Jewish home means facilitated immigration.
It does not mean a state religion.
It clearly says the home for Jews would be within the greater Arab Moslem Palestine.
Which at this time was 95% Arab Moslem..

Read the next sentence:
{,,, It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government. ...}
The Jews were only being granted such liberal immigration because they had vowed to have no part in the government of Palestine.
There was to be no Israel.
The Jews were lying and always intended to steal all of Palestine.

Spare us. I've had enough of your weaseling about delusional Palestinians and their imaginary homeland.

Wrong.
I have well documented the proof of Palestine's legal creation in 1920.

No nation called Palestine was created in 1920, moron.

Oh, then why were the British given the British Mandate for Palestine in 1920?
A mandate means the British were to train the Palestine government to be able to survive on its own, with independence.

But wait, you said Palestine became a nation in 1920. You sound very confused.

YES!
Palestine officially existed in boundary and definition as a sovereign entity in 1920.
But it did not yet have a government.
That is why the British were mandated to protect and train the Palestinians until they could defend themselves.

No it didn't. How could it be "sovereign" when the British government made the law there?

Same thing when any country is liberated during a war and its invader removed.
Temporarily a military commission rules.
But that does not alter the sovereign entity and rights, it just means its civilian government has not yet been prepared to take back over.

It was never a country, turd. There was never any "civilian government."

 

[bripat9643]

You people are remarkably forgiving of the only other country in the world that can make the decision that America will go to war.

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…​

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…

UPDATE “After Operation Protective Edge in 2014, former AP reporter Matti Friedman wrote in The Atlantic: “Hamas understood that reporters could be intimidated when necessary and that they w…

citizenfreepress.com

Just wait... Biden and his infidel believers will criticize Israel just as

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building​

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli air strike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.
Reporters for AP and Al Jazeera were forced to evacuate the 12-story building after the owner was warned that it would be targeted. Israeli forces struck the building an hour later, causing it to completely collapse.

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli airstrike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.AP President and CEO Gary Pruit…

thehill.com

By the way... has Hamas given anyone warnings about these attacks?

IMRA - Sunday, April 18, 2004 A Chronology of Terrorist Attacks Carried out by Hamas Since September 2000

www.imra.org.il

Well, the Israelis have done this sort of stuff for 70 years.

You mean attack their enemies? That's why we admire them.

Israelis attacked the worshippers at AlAqsa.. They engineered this fight so they could kill more Palestinians.

No, they didn't. More propaganda. Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque. The western narrative is a joke. Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets. Hamas needs to be annihilated.

Right proof

Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque.... Proof...

Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets.... Prove that Hamas actually did this and it wasn't Jihad...

Wrong.
There is no proof of any weapons from mosques, schools, hospitals, or any other questionable source.
The recent rockets were more than justified retaliation over the recent murder and land confiscations.

Sorry don't believe anything you write! NO substantiation! NO LINKS! ONLY your subjective and personalized opinion!

Liar.
I have quoted and linked more than anyone else on this board.
I am also right.

Right there! If you did you'd provide the numbers and links! Where is THAT proof of your statement? You proved the point ...AGAIN!!!
Total liar when you say that! Prove it!

Prove what?
You claim some sort of Hamas war crime, but there is no Hamas war crime.
Retaliation with rockets is perfectly legal when Israel murder, arrests, and confiscates.
Israel has no right to any of the West Bank.

Hamas deliberately launched rockets into civilian areas. There were no military targets. That's defined by the Geneva Convention as a war crime.

 

[Rigby5]

Bullshit

Learn to deal with facts and not expect media to be sycophants to your bias.

Instead they should be shills for your favorite ideologies? That's not how I see things.
Do you miss Pravda?

So, in your mind if the media isn't shilling for you bias it's shilling for someone else? s reporting of events and news ever not biased your sycophant's mind?

We know the media shills for the left and Muslim terrorists.

How can Muslims be "terrorists" when they are just defending their homelands?

Israel is not their homeland, moron.

WRONG!
Go read some history books.
Hebrew did not come from Palestine, but the Sinai.
Why do you think they went to Egypt for 400 years to escape a drought in the Sinai, if they came from Palestine, which never had a drought like that.
And why is it Palestine then was known of the Land of Canaan if it was the homeland of the Hebrew?
The Hebrew did invade around 1000 BC, but only ruled for a couple hundred years before being defeated and driven out by the Babylonians. They kept sneaking back, but were later defeated and driven out again and again, by the Assyrians and finally the Romans
The Hebrew never belonged there and were always illegal, brutal, invaders.
And they again were illegal foreign invaders in 1948.
They do not belong there.
It is NOT their homeland and never was.

Counter argument since YOU OFFERED NO LINKS...JUST your guesses.
Why is it so difficult to provide sources? As a result I assume you are guessing!

Israel's international "birth certificate" was validated by the promise of the Bible; uninterrupted Jewish settlement from the time of Joshua onward; the Balfour Declaration of 1917; the League of Nations Mandate, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration; the United Nations partition resolution of 1947; Israel's admission to the UN in 1949; the recognition of Israel by most other states; and, most of all, the society created by Israel's people in decades of thriving, dynamic national existence.​

Jewish Claim To The Land Of Israel

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

That is easy to prove is lies.

First of all, lets establish that Joshua was a brutal invader who massacred the native Canaanite in Jerusalem, around 1000 BC.
Then lets prove the claim of uninterrupted Jewish settlement is a lie.
Did not the the Assyrians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 701 BC?
Did not the the Babylonians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 587 BC?
Did not the the Romans defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 70 AD?
Did not the Crusaders massacre any remaining Jews from 1099 on?

As for the Balfour Declaration, England did not own Palestine at the time, so was invalid.
But it never intended or gave any hint of Jewish ownership, only facilitated immigration.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

And as for who does own Palestine, I suggest you refer to the Treaty of San Remo and Treaty of Sevres, which legally created the Moslem Palestine as agreed by the British for helping the Allies in WWI.
The British Mandate for Palestine was not a whim, but a contractual obligation to the Arab Moslems.

And finally, the hundreds of war crime resolution by the UN against Israel invalidate it utterly.
There has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel.

Where are you FACTS supporting your personal opinion such as "there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...

Question for you:
Would you consider a country that committed the following as more criminally than Israel?

Indeed, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the literary giant who wrote harrowingly about the Soviet gulag system, claimed the true number of Stalin’s victims might have been as high as 60 million.

How Many People Did Joseph Stalin Kill?

Most reputed scholars and historians estimate that the number of people Stalin killed ranges from between 20 and 60 million.

www.ibtimes.com

Or how about this country:
From 1958 to 1962, his Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of up to 45 million people – easily making it the biggest episode of mass murder ever recorded.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/08/03/giving-historys-greatest-mass-murderer-his-due/

Now why should ANY ONE believe anything you write because right with this stupidly ignorant statement you show that anything you write is totally biased. Totally ignorant. AND truly unsubstantiated.
Compared to 100 million killed by Stalin/Mao i.e Communists which evidently (YOU ARE)... where do you get off on saying ""there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...
Don't you see that anyone who reads that and knows history will say that guy is crazy!

This asshole believes "Palestine" is a real country but Israel isn't.

The natives are Palestinian, while the Zionists are all illegal immigrants, mostly from Poland and Russia.
Palestine was made in 1920 by world treaty and legal obligation.
Israel was created essentially by Truman's unilateral fiat in 1949.

There's no such country as Palestine, and the people who claim they are Palestinian are almost entirely from somewhere else.

That makes no sense.
Palestine, (AKA the Land of Canaan, the Levant, etc.,) is always described as the most popular and densely populated in the entire Mideast.
The Oranges of Jaffa were world famous in the 1800s.
In 1922 the census says 3/4 of a million Palestinians, with only 4% being Jewish.
(It actually would have been higher total, but WWI and disease brought it down.)
So then how could 3/4 of a million Palestinian, mostly Moslem, not be a Palestine in 1922?
Especially since Palestine had just been legally mandated by treaty in 1920?

Canaan is one thing, and Palestine was another. The later was a creation of the United Nations. It wasn't a country.

You wouldn't ask questions like you did if you had simply read the facts. There has never been a country called Palestine. The territory the UN put Britain in charge of was divided up into Israel and Jordan. The so-called "Palestinians" are actually Jordanians.

Wrong.
Palestine was created by the League of Nations, the Treaty of San Remo, the Treaty of Sevres, and the Allies from WWI, in 1920.
That was before the UN was created in 1945.
The UN had nothing to do with creating Palestine in 1920.

The British were mandated only to create an Arab Palestine, and there is no legal basis for Israel.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...
Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

Your article only supports what I've been saying.

No it does not.
It says that Palestine is to be Arab and Moslem, but that Jews are to be allowed immigration as long as they stay below the limit.
There is never to be a Jewish state.

Wrong, idiot:

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.'​

A Jewish home means facilitated immigration.
It does not mean a state religion.
It clearly says the home for Jews would be within the greater Arab Moslem Palestine.
Which at this time was 95% Arab Moslem..

Read the next sentence:
{,,, It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government. ...}
The Jews were only being granted such liberal immigration because they had vowed to have no part in the government of Palestine.
There was to be no Israel.
The Jews were lying and always intended to steal all of Palestine.

Spare us. I've had enough of your weaseling about delusional Palestinians and their imaginary homeland.

Wrong.
I have well documented the proof of Palestine's legal creation in 1920.

No nation called Palestine was created in 1920, moron.

Oh, then why were the British given the British Mandate for Palestine in 1920?
A mandate means the British were to train the Palestine government to be able to survive on its own, with independence.

But wait, you said Palestine became a nation in 1920. You sound very confused.

YES!
Palestine officially existed in boundary and definition as a sovereign entity in 1920.
But it did not yet have a government.
That is why the British were mandated to protect and train the Palestinians until they could defend themselves.

No it didn't. How could it be "sovereign" when the British government made the law there?

Same thing when any country is liberated during a war and its invader removed.
Temporarily a military commission rules.
But that does not alter the sovereign entity and rights, it just means its civilian government has not yet been prepared to take back over.

It was never a country, turd. There was never any "civilian government."

Of course there was a country.
A "Mandate" is for an independent country, and nothing else.
The problem is that the Zionists blew up the British high command in Palestine, and the British then wanted out without finishing their mandate.

 

[Rigby5]

You people are remarkably forgiving of the only other country in the world that can make the decision that America will go to war.

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…​

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…

UPDATE “After Operation Protective Edge in 2014, former AP reporter Matti Friedman wrote in The Atlantic: “Hamas understood that reporters could be intimidated when necessary and that they w…

citizenfreepress.com

Just wait... Biden and his infidel believers will criticize Israel just as

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building​

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli air strike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.
Reporters for AP and Al Jazeera were forced to evacuate the 12-story building after the owner was warned that it would be targeted. Israeli forces struck the building an hour later, causing it to completely collapse.

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli airstrike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.AP President and CEO Gary Pruit…

thehill.com

By the way... has Hamas given anyone warnings about these attacks?

IMRA - Sunday, April 18, 2004 A Chronology of Terrorist Attacks Carried out by Hamas Since September 2000

www.imra.org.il

Well, the Israelis have done this sort of stuff for 70 years.

You mean attack their enemies? That's why we admire them.

Israelis attacked the worshippers at AlAqsa.. They engineered this fight so they could kill more Palestinians.

No, they didn't. More propaganda. Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque. The western narrative is a joke. Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets. Hamas needs to be annihilated.

Right proof

Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque.... Proof...

Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets.... Prove that Hamas actually did this and it wasn't Jihad...

Wrong.
There is no proof of any weapons from mosques, schools, hospitals, or any other questionable source.
The recent rockets were more than justified retaliation over the recent murder and land confiscations.

Sorry don't believe anything you write! NO substantiation! NO LINKS! ONLY your subjective and personalized opinion!

Liar.
I have quoted and linked more than anyone else on this board.
I am also right.

Right there! If you did you'd provide the numbers and links! Where is THAT proof of your statement? You proved the point ...AGAIN!!!
Total liar when you say that! Prove it!

Prove what?
You claim some sort of Hamas war crime, but there is no Hamas war crime.
Retaliation with rockets is perfectly legal when Israel murder, arrests, and confiscates.
Israel has no right to any of the West Bank.

Hamas deliberately launched rockets into civilian areas. There were no military targets. That's defined by the Geneva Convention as a war crime.

Wrong.
The US routinely bombed civilian areas in WWII.
That is not illegal if that is the best anyone could do under the circumstances.
You are allowed to attack economic support for example.
That is why in WWII they were allowed to attack German food production with the "Damn Buster" bombs.
Flooding fields is not a military target either.

 

[Rigby5]

For some reason I can't cut/paste from this link, but it shows the Zionists were at fault for the conflict and were not supposed to get sovereignty.

British Mandate of Palestine- a Complete Overview

British Mandate of Palestine- the Shaw Commission suggested partition as a solution to the conflicts as it recognized two incongruous societies...

www.wise2wisdom.org

Specifically why they were at fault is that they illegally flooded Palestine with more than 10 times the legal quota, and illegally murdered the British high command in the King David Hotel bombing.
They were immigrants so had no rights to the land, while the Palestinians did have rights as natives.

 

[bripat9643]

Bullshit

Learn to deal with facts and not expect media to be sycophants to your bias.

Instead they should be shills for your favorite ideologies? That's not how I see things.
Do you miss Pravda?

So, in your mind if the media isn't shilling for you bias it's shilling for someone else? s reporting of events and news ever not biased your sycophant's mind?

We know the media shills for the left and Muslim terrorists.

How can Muslims be "terrorists" when they are just defending their homelands?

Israel is not their homeland, moron.

WRONG!
Go read some history books.
Hebrew did not come from Palestine, but the Sinai.
Why do you think they went to Egypt for 400 years to escape a drought in the Sinai, if they came from Palestine, which never had a drought like that.
And why is it Palestine then was known of the Land of Canaan if it was the homeland of the Hebrew?
The Hebrew did invade around 1000 BC, but only ruled for a couple hundred years before being defeated and driven out by the Babylonians. They kept sneaking back, but were later defeated and driven out again and again, by the Assyrians and finally the Romans
The Hebrew never belonged there and were always illegal, brutal, invaders.
And they again were illegal foreign invaders in 1948.
They do not belong there.
It is NOT their homeland and never was.

Counter argument since YOU OFFERED NO LINKS...JUST your guesses.
Why is it so difficult to provide sources? As a result I assume you are guessing!

Israel's international "birth certificate" was validated by the promise of the Bible; uninterrupted Jewish settlement from the time of Joshua onward; the Balfour Declaration of 1917; the League of Nations Mandate, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration; the United Nations partition resolution of 1947; Israel's admission to the UN in 1949; the recognition of Israel by most other states; and, most of all, the society created by Israel's people in decades of thriving, dynamic national existence.​

Jewish Claim To The Land Of Israel

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

That is easy to prove is lies.

First of all, lets establish that Joshua was a brutal invader who massacred the native Canaanite in Jerusalem, around 1000 BC.
Then lets prove the claim of uninterrupted Jewish settlement is a lie.
Did not the the Assyrians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 701 BC?
Did not the the Babylonians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 587 BC?
Did not the the Romans defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 70 AD?
Did not the Crusaders massacre any remaining Jews from 1099 on?

As for the Balfour Declaration, England did not own Palestine at the time, so was invalid.
But it never intended or gave any hint of Jewish ownership, only facilitated immigration.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

And as for who does own Palestine, I suggest you refer to the Treaty of San Remo and Treaty of Sevres, which legally created the Moslem Palestine as agreed by the British for helping the Allies in WWI.
The British Mandate for Palestine was not a whim, but a contractual obligation to the Arab Moslems.

And finally, the hundreds of war crime resolution by the UN against Israel invalidate it utterly.
There has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel.

Where are you FACTS supporting your personal opinion such as "there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...

Question for you:
Would you consider a country that committed the following as more criminally than Israel?

Indeed, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the literary giant who wrote harrowingly about the Soviet gulag system, claimed the true number of Stalin’s victims might have been as high as 60 million.

How Many People Did Joseph Stalin Kill?

Most reputed scholars and historians estimate that the number of people Stalin killed ranges from between 20 and 60 million.

www.ibtimes.com

Or how about this country:
From 1958 to 1962, his Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of up to 45 million people – easily making it the biggest episode of mass murder ever recorded.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/08/03/giving-historys-greatest-mass-murderer-his-due/

Now why should ANY ONE believe anything you write because right with this stupidly ignorant statement you show that anything you write is totally biased. Totally ignorant. AND truly unsubstantiated.
Compared to 100 million killed by Stalin/Mao i.e Communists which evidently (YOU ARE)... where do you get off on saying ""there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...
Don't you see that anyone who reads that and knows history will say that guy is crazy!

This asshole believes "Palestine" is a real country but Israel isn't.

The natives are Palestinian, while the Zionists are all illegal immigrants, mostly from Poland and Russia.
Palestine was made in 1920 by world treaty and legal obligation.
Israel was created essentially by Truman's unilateral fiat in 1949.

There's no such country as Palestine, and the people who claim they are Palestinian are almost entirely from somewhere else.

That makes no sense.
Palestine, (AKA the Land of Canaan, the Levant, etc.,) is always described as the most popular and densely populated in the entire Mideast.
The Oranges of Jaffa were world famous in the 1800s.
In 1922 the census says 3/4 of a million Palestinians, with only 4% being Jewish.
(It actually would have been higher total, but WWI and disease brought it down.)
So then how could 3/4 of a million Palestinian, mostly Moslem, not be a Palestine in 1922?
Especially since Palestine had just been legally mandated by treaty in 1920?

Canaan is one thing, and Palestine was another. The later was a creation of the United Nations. It wasn't a country.

You wouldn't ask questions like you did if you had simply read the facts. There has never been a country called Palestine. The territory the UN put Britain in charge of was divided up into Israel and Jordan. The so-called "Palestinians" are actually Jordanians.

Wrong.
Palestine was created by the League of Nations, the Treaty of San Remo, the Treaty of Sevres, and the Allies from WWI, in 1920.
That was before the UN was created in 1945.
The UN had nothing to do with creating Palestine in 1920.

The British were mandated only to create an Arab Palestine, and there is no legal basis for Israel.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...
Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

Your article only supports what I've been saying.

No it does not.
It says that Palestine is to be Arab and Moslem, but that Jews are to be allowed immigration as long as they stay below the limit.
There is never to be a Jewish state.

Wrong, idiot:

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.'​

A Jewish home means facilitated immigration.
It does not mean a state religion.
It clearly says the home for Jews would be within the greater Arab Moslem Palestine.
Which at this time was 95% Arab Moslem..

Read the next sentence:
{,,, It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government. ...}
The Jews were only being granted such liberal immigration because they had vowed to have no part in the government of Palestine.
There was to be no Israel.
The Jews were lying and always intended to steal all of Palestine.

Spare us. I've had enough of your weaseling about delusional Palestinians and their imaginary homeland.

Wrong.
I have well documented the proof of Palestine's legal creation in 1920.

No nation called Palestine was created in 1920, moron.

Oh, then why were the British given the British Mandate for Palestine in 1920?
A mandate means the British were to train the Palestine government to be able to survive on its own, with independence.

But wait, you said Palestine became a nation in 1920. You sound very confused.

YES!
Palestine officially existed in boundary and definition as a sovereign entity in 1920.
But it did not yet have a government.
That is why the British were mandated to protect and train the Palestinians until they could defend themselves.

No it didn't. How could it be "sovereign" when the British government made the law there?

Same thing when any country is liberated during a war and its invader removed.
Temporarily a military commission rules.
But that does not alter the sovereign entity and rights, it just means its civilian government has not yet been prepared to take back over.

It was never a country, turd. There was never any "civilian government."

Of course there was a country.
A "Mandate" is for an independent country, and nothing else.
The problem is that the Zionists blew up the British high command in Palestine, and the British then wanted out without finishing their mandate.

Sorry, turd, but the term "mandate" didn't exist until after WW I. What it really means is that area was British teritory. Suppossedly there were suppose to manage it until it was decided how to allocate it.

 

[bripat9643]

For some reason I can't cut/paste from this link, but it shows the Zionists were at fault for the conflict and were not supposed to get sovereignty.

British Mandate of Palestine- a Complete Overview

British Mandate of Palestine- the Shaw Commission suggested partition as a solution to the conflicts as it recognized two incongruous societies...

www.wise2wisdom.org

Specifically why they were at fault is that they illegally flooded Palestine with more than 10 times the legal quota, and illegally murdered the British high command in the King David Hotel bombing.
They were immigrants so had no rights to the land, while the Palestinians did have rights as natives.

Of course it shows the supposed "Zionists" were at fault because it's a leftwing blog.

 

[bripat9643]

You people are remarkably forgiving of the only other country in the world that can make the decision that America will go to war.

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…​

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…

UPDATE “After Operation Protective Edge in 2014, former AP reporter Matti Friedman wrote in The Atlantic: “Hamas understood that reporters could be intimidated when necessary and that they w…

citizenfreepress.com

Just wait... Biden and his infidel believers will criticize Israel just as

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building​

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli air strike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.
Reporters for AP and Al Jazeera were forced to evacuate the 12-story building after the owner was warned that it would be targeted. Israeli forces struck the building an hour later, causing it to completely collapse.

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli airstrike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.AP President and CEO Gary Pruit…

thehill.com

By the way... has Hamas given anyone warnings about these attacks?

IMRA - Sunday, April 18, 2004 A Chronology of Terrorist Attacks Carried out by Hamas Since September 2000

www.imra.org.il

Well, the Israelis have done this sort of stuff for 70 years.

You mean attack their enemies? That's why we admire them.

Israelis attacked the worshippers at AlAqsa.. They engineered this fight so they could kill more Palestinians.

No, they didn't. More propaganda. Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque. The western narrative is a joke. Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets. Hamas needs to be annihilated.

Right proof

Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque.... Proof...

Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets.... Prove that Hamas actually did this and it wasn't Jihad...

Wrong.
There is no proof of any weapons from mosques, schools, hospitals, or any other questionable source.
The recent rockets were more than justified retaliation over the recent murder and land confiscations.

Sorry don't believe anything you write! NO substantiation! NO LINKS! ONLY your subjective and personalized opinion!

Liar.
I have quoted and linked more than anyone else on this board.
I am also right.

Right there! If you did you'd provide the numbers and links! Where is THAT proof of your statement? You proved the point ...AGAIN!!!
Total liar when you say that! Prove it!

Prove what?
You claim some sort of Hamas war crime, but there is no Hamas war crime.
Retaliation with rockets is perfectly legal when Israel murder, arrests, and confiscates.
Israel has no right to any of the West Bank.

Hamas deliberately launched rockets into civilian areas. There were no military targets. That's defined by the Geneva Convention as a war crime.

Wrong.
The US routinely bombed civilian areas in WWII.
That is not illegal if that is the best anyone could do under the circumstances.
You are allowed to attack economic support for example.
That is why in WWII they were allowed to attack German food production with the "Damn Buster" bombs.
Flooding fields is not a military target either.

That's true, moron, but that section of the Geneva accords was adopted after WW II specifically for that reason.

Aerial bombardment and international law - Wikipedia

In 1977, Protocol I was adopted as an amendment to the Geneva Conventions, prohibiting the deliberate or indiscriminate attack of civilians and civilian objects, even if the area contained military objectives, and the attacking force must take precautions and steps to spare the lives of civilians and civilian objects as possible. However, forces occupying near densely populated areas must avoid locating military objectives near or in densely populated areas and endeavor to remove civilians from the vicinity of military objectives. Failure to do so would cause a higher civilian death toll resulting from bombardment by the attacking force and the defenders would be held responsible, even criminally liable, for these deaths.​

 

[bripat9643]

For some reason I can't cut/paste from this link, but it shows the Zionists were at fault for the conflict and were not supposed to get sovereignty.

British Mandate of Palestine- a Complete Overview

British Mandate of Palestine- the Shaw Commission suggested partition as a solution to the conflicts as it recognized two incongruous societies...

www.wise2wisdom.org

Specifically why they were at fault is that they illegally flooded Palestine with more than 10 times the legal quota, and illegally murdered the British high command in the King David Hotel bombing.
They were immigrants so had no rights to the land, while the Palestinians did have rights as natives.

You're the kind who says Mexicans have a right to enter our country illegally and that the government is committing a crime when it deports them.

 

[Rigby5]

Bullshit

Learn to deal with facts and not expect media to be sycophants to your bias.

Instead they should be shills for your favorite ideologies? That's not how I see things.
Do you miss Pravda?

So, in your mind if the media isn't shilling for you bias it's shilling for someone else? s reporting of events and news ever not biased your sycophant's mind?

We know the media shills for the left and Muslim terrorists.

How can Muslims be "terrorists" when they are just defending their homelands?

Israel is not their homeland, moron.

WRONG!
Go read some history books.
Hebrew did not come from Palestine, but the Sinai.
Why do you think they went to Egypt for 400 years to escape a drought in the Sinai, if they came from Palestine, which never had a drought like that.
And why is it Palestine then was known of the Land of Canaan if it was the homeland of the Hebrew?
The Hebrew did invade around 1000 BC, but only ruled for a couple hundred years before being defeated and driven out by the Babylonians. They kept sneaking back, but were later defeated and driven out again and again, by the Assyrians and finally the Romans
The Hebrew never belonged there and were always illegal, brutal, invaders.
And they again were illegal foreign invaders in 1948.
They do not belong there.
It is NOT their homeland and never was.

Counter argument since YOU OFFERED NO LINKS...JUST your guesses.
Why is it so difficult to provide sources? As a result I assume you are guessing!

Israel's international "birth certificate" was validated by the promise of the Bible; uninterrupted Jewish settlement from the time of Joshua onward; the Balfour Declaration of 1917; the League of Nations Mandate, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration; the United Nations partition resolution of 1947; Israel's admission to the UN in 1949; the recognition of Israel by most other states; and, most of all, the society created by Israel's people in decades of thriving, dynamic national existence.​

Jewish Claim To The Land Of Israel

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

That is easy to prove is lies.

First of all, lets establish that Joshua was a brutal invader who massacred the native Canaanite in Jerusalem, around 1000 BC.
Then lets prove the claim of uninterrupted Jewish settlement is a lie.
Did not the the Assyrians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 701 BC?
Did not the the Babylonians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 587 BC?
Did not the the Romans defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 70 AD?
Did not the Crusaders massacre any remaining Jews from 1099 on?

As for the Balfour Declaration, England did not own Palestine at the time, so was invalid.
But it never intended or gave any hint of Jewish ownership, only facilitated immigration.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

And as for who does own Palestine, I suggest you refer to the Treaty of San Remo and Treaty of Sevres, which legally created the Moslem Palestine as agreed by the British for helping the Allies in WWI.
The British Mandate for Palestine was not a whim, but a contractual obligation to the Arab Moslems.

And finally, the hundreds of war crime resolution by the UN against Israel invalidate it utterly.
There has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel.

Where are you FACTS supporting your personal opinion such as "there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...

Question for you:
Would you consider a country that committed the following as more criminally than Israel?

Indeed, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the literary giant who wrote harrowingly about the Soviet gulag system, claimed the true number of Stalin’s victims might have been as high as 60 million.

How Many People Did Joseph Stalin Kill?

Most reputed scholars and historians estimate that the number of people Stalin killed ranges from between 20 and 60 million.

www.ibtimes.com

Or how about this country:
From 1958 to 1962, his Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of up to 45 million people – easily making it the biggest episode of mass murder ever recorded.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/08/03/giving-historys-greatest-mass-murderer-his-due/

Now why should ANY ONE believe anything you write because right with this stupidly ignorant statement you show that anything you write is totally biased. Totally ignorant. AND truly unsubstantiated.
Compared to 100 million killed by Stalin/Mao i.e Communists which evidently (YOU ARE)... where do you get off on saying ""there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...
Don't you see that anyone who reads that and knows history will say that guy is crazy!

This asshole believes "Palestine" is a real country but Israel isn't.

The natives are Palestinian, while the Zionists are all illegal immigrants, mostly from Poland and Russia.
Palestine was made in 1920 by world treaty and legal obligation.
Israel was created essentially by Truman's unilateral fiat in 1949.

There's no such country as Palestine, and the people who claim they are Palestinian are almost entirely from somewhere else.

That makes no sense.
Palestine, (AKA the Land of Canaan, the Levant, etc.,) is always described as the most popular and densely populated in the entire Mideast.
The Oranges of Jaffa were world famous in the 1800s.
In 1922 the census says 3/4 of a million Palestinians, with only 4% being Jewish.
(It actually would have been higher total, but WWI and disease brought it down.)
So then how could 3/4 of a million Palestinian, mostly Moslem, not be a Palestine in 1922?
Especially since Palestine had just been legally mandated by treaty in 1920?

Canaan is one thing, and Palestine was another. The later was a creation of the United Nations. It wasn't a country.

You wouldn't ask questions like you did if you had simply read the facts. There has never been a country called Palestine. The territory the UN put Britain in charge of was divided up into Israel and Jordan. The so-called "Palestinians" are actually Jordanians.

Wrong.
Palestine was created by the League of Nations, the Treaty of San Remo, the Treaty of Sevres, and the Allies from WWI, in 1920.
That was before the UN was created in 1945.
The UN had nothing to do with creating Palestine in 1920.

The British were mandated only to create an Arab Palestine, and there is no legal basis for Israel.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...
Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

Your article only supports what I've been saying.

No it does not.
It says that Palestine is to be Arab and Moslem, but that Jews are to be allowed immigration as long as they stay below the limit.
There is never to be a Jewish state.

Wrong, idiot:

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.'​

A Jewish home means facilitated immigration.
It does not mean a state religion.
It clearly says the home for Jews would be within the greater Arab Moslem Palestine.
Which at this time was 95% Arab Moslem..

Read the next sentence:
{,,, It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government. ...}
The Jews were only being granted such liberal immigration because they had vowed to have no part in the government of Palestine.
There was to be no Israel.
The Jews were lying and always intended to steal all of Palestine.

Spare us. I've had enough of your weaseling about delusional Palestinians and their imaginary homeland.

Wrong.
I have well documented the proof of Palestine's legal creation in 1920.

No nation called Palestine was created in 1920, moron.

Oh, then why were the British given the British Mandate for Palestine in 1920?
A mandate means the British were to train the Palestine government to be able to survive on its own, with independence.

But wait, you said Palestine became a nation in 1920. You sound very confused.

YES!
Palestine officially existed in boundary and definition as a sovereign entity in 1920.
But it did not yet have a government.
That is why the British were mandated to protect and train the Palestinians until they could defend themselves.

No it didn't. How could it be "sovereign" when the British government made the law there?

Same thing when any country is liberated during a war and its invader removed.
Temporarily a military commission rules.
But that does not alter the sovereign entity and rights, it just means its civilian government has not yet been prepared to take back over.

It was never a country, turd. There was never any "civilian government."

Of course there was a country.
A "Mandate" is for an independent country, and nothing else.
The problem is that the Zionists blew up the British high command in Palestine, and the British then wanted out without finishing their mandate.

Sorry, turd, but the term "mandate" didn't exist until after WW I. What it really means is that area was British teritory. Suppossedly there were suppose to manage it until it was decided how to allocate it.

Yes it did.
The word mandate has always been around n terms of geopolitics.
It means territory that has officially been assigned in some way.
It means the British could NOT just do whatever they wanted to with it.

{...
mandate
[ˈmanˌdāt]

NOUN

1. an official order or commission to do something.
   "a mandate to seek the release of political prisoners"
   synonyms:
   instruction · directive · direction · decree · command · order · injunction · edict·
   [more]
2. the authority to carry out a policy or course of action, regarded as given by the electorate to a candidate or party that is victorious in an election.
   "a sick leader living beyond his mandate"
   synonyms:
   authority · approval · acceptance · ratification · indorsement · sanction · authorization

VERB

1. give (someone) authority to act in a certain way.
   "other colleges have mandated coed fraternities"
   synonyms:
   authorize · commission · depute · appoint · nominate · name · empower · charge · choose · select · designate · elect · detail
2. historical
   assign (territory) under a mandate of the League of Nations.
   "mandated territories"
   ...}
   

 

[Rigby5]

For some reason I can't cut/paste from this link, but it shows the Zionists were at fault for the conflict and were not supposed to get sovereignty.

British Mandate of Palestine- a Complete Overview

British Mandate of Palestine- the Shaw Commission suggested partition as a solution to the conflicts as it recognized two incongruous societies...

www.wise2wisdom.org

Specifically why they were at fault is that they illegally flooded Palestine with more than 10 times the legal quota, and illegally murdered the British high command in the King David Hotel bombing.
They were immigrants so had no rights to the land, while the Palestinians did have rights as natives.

Of course it shows the supposed "Zionists" were at fault because it's a leftwing blog.

Isn't that a little confusing, because Jews generally are left wing liberals and strict Moslems always more right wing?

 

[bripat9643]

Bullshit

Learn to deal with facts and not expect media to be sycophants to your bias.

Instead they should be shills for your favorite ideologies? That's not how I see things.
Do you miss Pravda?

So, in your mind if the media isn't shilling for you bias it's shilling for someone else? s reporting of events and news ever not biased your sycophant's mind?

We know the media shills for the left and Muslim terrorists.

How can Muslims be "terrorists" when they are just defending their homelands?

Israel is not their homeland, moron.

WRONG!
Go read some history books.
Hebrew did not come from Palestine, but the Sinai.
Why do you think they went to Egypt for 400 years to escape a drought in the Sinai, if they came from Palestine, which never had a drought like that.
And why is it Palestine then was known of the Land of Canaan if it was the homeland of the Hebrew?
The Hebrew did invade around 1000 BC, but only ruled for a couple hundred years before being defeated and driven out by the Babylonians. They kept sneaking back, but were later defeated and driven out again and again, by the Assyrians and finally the Romans
The Hebrew never belonged there and were always illegal, brutal, invaders.
And they again were illegal foreign invaders in 1948.
They do not belong there.
It is NOT their homeland and never was.

Counter argument since YOU OFFERED NO LINKS...JUST your guesses.
Why is it so difficult to provide sources? As a result I assume you are guessing!

Israel's international "birth certificate" was validated by the promise of the Bible; uninterrupted Jewish settlement from the time of Joshua onward; the Balfour Declaration of 1917; the League of Nations Mandate, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration; the United Nations partition resolution of 1947; Israel's admission to the UN in 1949; the recognition of Israel by most other states; and, most of all, the society created by Israel's people in decades of thriving, dynamic national existence.​

Jewish Claim To The Land Of Israel

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

That is easy to prove is lies.

First of all, lets establish that Joshua was a brutal invader who massacred the native Canaanite in Jerusalem, around 1000 BC.
Then lets prove the claim of uninterrupted Jewish settlement is a lie.
Did not the the Assyrians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 701 BC?
Did not the the Babylonians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 587 BC?
Did not the the Romans defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 70 AD?
Did not the Crusaders massacre any remaining Jews from 1099 on?

As for the Balfour Declaration, England did not own Palestine at the time, so was invalid.
But it never intended or gave any hint of Jewish ownership, only facilitated immigration.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

And as for who does own Palestine, I suggest you refer to the Treaty of San Remo and Treaty of Sevres, which legally created the Moslem Palestine as agreed by the British for helping the Allies in WWI.
The British Mandate for Palestine was not a whim, but a contractual obligation to the Arab Moslems.

And finally, the hundreds of war crime resolution by the UN against Israel invalidate it utterly.
There has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel.

Where are you FACTS supporting your personal opinion such as "there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...

Question for you:
Would you consider a country that committed the following as more criminally than Israel?

Indeed, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the literary giant who wrote harrowingly about the Soviet gulag system, claimed the true number of Stalin’s victims might have been as high as 60 million.

How Many People Did Joseph Stalin Kill?

Most reputed scholars and historians estimate that the number of people Stalin killed ranges from between 20 and 60 million.

www.ibtimes.com

Or how about this country:
From 1958 to 1962, his Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of up to 45 million people – easily making it the biggest episode of mass murder ever recorded.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/08/03/giving-historys-greatest-mass-murderer-his-due/

Now why should ANY ONE believe anything you write because right with this stupidly ignorant statement you show that anything you write is totally biased. Totally ignorant. AND truly unsubstantiated.
Compared to 100 million killed by Stalin/Mao i.e Communists which evidently (YOU ARE)... where do you get off on saying ""there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...
Don't you see that anyone who reads that and knows history will say that guy is crazy!

This asshole believes "Palestine" is a real country but Israel isn't.

The natives are Palestinian, while the Zionists are all illegal immigrants, mostly from Poland and Russia.
Palestine was made in 1920 by world treaty and legal obligation.
Israel was created essentially by Truman's unilateral fiat in 1949.

There's no such country as Palestine, and the people who claim they are Palestinian are almost entirely from somewhere else.

That makes no sense.
Palestine, (AKA the Land of Canaan, the Levant, etc.,) is always described as the most popular and densely populated in the entire Mideast.
The Oranges of Jaffa were world famous in the 1800s.
In 1922 the census says 3/4 of a million Palestinians, with only 4% being Jewish.
(It actually would have been higher total, but WWI and disease brought it down.)
So then how could 3/4 of a million Palestinian, mostly Moslem, not be a Palestine in 1922?
Especially since Palestine had just been legally mandated by treaty in 1920?

Canaan is one thing, and Palestine was another. The later was a creation of the United Nations. It wasn't a country.

You wouldn't ask questions like you did if you had simply read the facts. There has never been a country called Palestine. The territory the UN put Britain in charge of was divided up into Israel and Jordan. The so-called "Palestinians" are actually Jordanians.

Wrong.
Palestine was created by the League of Nations, the Treaty of San Remo, the Treaty of Sevres, and the Allies from WWI, in 1920.
That was before the UN was created in 1945.
The UN had nothing to do with creating Palestine in 1920.

The British were mandated only to create an Arab Palestine, and there is no legal basis for Israel.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...
Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

Your article only supports what I've been saying.

No it does not.
It says that Palestine is to be Arab and Moslem, but that Jews are to be allowed immigration as long as they stay below the limit.
There is never to be a Jewish state.

Wrong, idiot:

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.'​

A Jewish home means facilitated immigration.
It does not mean a state religion.
It clearly says the home for Jews would be within the greater Arab Moslem Palestine.
Which at this time was 95% Arab Moslem..

Read the next sentence:
{,,, It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government. ...}
The Jews were only being granted such liberal immigration because they had vowed to have no part in the government of Palestine.
There was to be no Israel.
The Jews were lying and always intended to steal all of Palestine.

Spare us. I've had enough of your weaseling about delusional Palestinians and their imaginary homeland.

Wrong.
I have well documented the proof of Palestine's legal creation in 1920.

No nation called Palestine was created in 1920, moron.

Oh, then why were the British given the British Mandate for Palestine in 1920?
A mandate means the British were to train the Palestine government to be able to survive on its own, with independence.

But wait, you said Palestine became a nation in 1920. You sound very confused.

YES!
Palestine officially existed in boundary and definition as a sovereign entity in 1920.
But it did not yet have a government.
That is why the British were mandated to protect and train the Palestinians until they could defend themselves.

No it didn't. How could it be "sovereign" when the British government made the law there?

Same thing when any country is liberated during a war and its invader removed.
Temporarily a military commission rules.
But that does not alter the sovereign entity and rights, it just means its civilian government has not yet been prepared to take back over.

It was never a country, turd. There was never any "civilian government."

Of course there was a country.
A "Mandate" is for an independent country, and nothing else.
The problem is that the Zionists blew up the British high command in Palestine, and the British then wanted out without finishing their mandate.

Sorry, turd, but the term "mandate" didn't exist until after WW I. What it really means is that area was British teritory. Suppossedly there were suppose to manage it until it was decided how to allocate it.

Yes it did.
The word mandate has always been around n terms of geopolitics.
It means territory that has officially been assigned in some way.
It means the British could NOT just do whatever they wanted to with it.

{...
mandate
[ˈmanˌdāt]

NOUN

1. an official order or commission to do something.
   "a mandate to seek the release of political prisoners"
   synonyms:
   instruction · directive · direction · decree · command · order · injunction · edict·
   [more]
2. the authority to carry out a policy or course of action, regarded as given by the electorate to a candidate or party that is victorious in an election.
   "a sick leader living beyond his mandate"
   synonyms:
   authority · approval · acceptance · ratification · indorsement · sanction · authorization

VERB

1. give (someone) authority to act in a certain way.
   "other colleges have mandated coed fraternities"
   synonyms:
   authorize · commission · depute · appoint · nominate · name · empower · charge · choose · select · designate · elect · detail
2. historical
   assign (territory) under a mandate of the League of Nations.
   "mandated territories"
   ...}

Here is the definition of the term in the way the signatories to the League of Nations meant it.

​

Historical​

assign (territory) under a mandate of the League of Nations.​

"mandated territories"​

 

[bripat9643]

For some reason I can't cut/paste from this link, but it shows the Zionists were at fault for the conflict and were not supposed to get sovereignty.

British Mandate of Palestine- a Complete Overview

British Mandate of Palestine- the Shaw Commission suggested partition as a solution to the conflicts as it recognized two incongruous societies...

www.wise2wisdom.org

Specifically why they were at fault is that they illegally flooded Palestine with more than 10 times the legal quota, and illegally murdered the British high command in the King David Hotel bombing.
They were immigrants so had no rights to the land, while the Palestinians did have rights as natives.

Of course it shows the supposed "Zionists" were at fault because it's a leftwing blog.

Isn't that a little confusing, because Jews generally are left wing liberals and strict Moslems always more right wing?

Your bulshit doen't confuse me at all. If Moslems are "right-wing" then why are Democrats always defending them?

 

[Rigby5]

You people are remarkably forgiving of the only other country in the world that can make the decision that America will go to war.

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…​

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…

UPDATE “After Operation Protective Edge in 2014, former AP reporter Matti Friedman wrote in The Atlantic: “Hamas understood that reporters could be intimidated when necessary and that they w…

citizenfreepress.com

Just wait... Biden and his infidel believers will criticize Israel just as

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building​

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli air strike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.
Reporters for AP and Al Jazeera were forced to evacuate the 12-story building after the owner was warned that it would be targeted. Israeli forces struck the building an hour later, causing it to completely collapse.

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli airstrike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.AP President and CEO Gary Pruit…

thehill.com

By the way... has Hamas given anyone warnings about these attacks?

IMRA - Sunday, April 18, 2004 A Chronology of Terrorist Attacks Carried out by Hamas Since September 2000

www.imra.org.il

Well, the Israelis have done this sort of stuff for 70 years.

You mean attack their enemies? That's why we admire them.

Israelis attacked the worshippers at AlAqsa.. They engineered this fight so they could kill more Palestinians.

No, they didn't. More propaganda. Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque. The western narrative is a joke. Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets. Hamas needs to be annihilated.

Right proof

Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque.... Proof...

Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets.... Prove that Hamas actually did this and it wasn't Jihad...

Wrong.
There is no proof of any weapons from mosques, schools, hospitals, or any other questionable source.
The recent rockets were more than justified retaliation over the recent murder and land confiscations.

Sorry don't believe anything you write! NO substantiation! NO LINKS! ONLY your subjective and personalized opinion!

Liar.
I have quoted and linked more than anyone else on this board.
I am also right.

Right there! If you did you'd provide the numbers and links! Where is THAT proof of your statement? You proved the point ...AGAIN!!!
Total liar when you say that! Prove it!

Prove what?
You claim some sort of Hamas war crime, but there is no Hamas war crime.
Retaliation with rockets is perfectly legal when Israel murder, arrests, and confiscates.
Israel has no right to any of the West Bank.

Hamas deliberately launched rockets into civilian areas. There were no military targets. That's defined by the Geneva Convention as a war crime.

Wrong.
The US routinely bombed civilian areas in WWII.
That is not illegal if that is the best anyone could do under the circumstances.
You are allowed to attack economic support for example.
That is why in WWII they were allowed to attack German food production with the "Damn Buster" bombs.
Flooding fields is not a military target either.

That's true, moron, but that section of the Geneva accords was adopted after WW II specifically for that reason.

Aerial bombardment and international law - Wikipedia

In 1977, Protocol I was adopted as an amendment to the Geneva Conventions, prohibiting the deliberate or indiscriminate attack of civilians and civilian objects, even if the area contained military objectives, and the attacking force must take precautions and steps to spare the lives of civilians and civilian objects as possible. However, forces occupying near densely populated areas must avoid locating military objectives near or in densely populated areas and endeavor to remove civilians from the vicinity of military objectives. Failure to do so would cause a higher civilian death toll resulting from bombardment by the attacking force and the defenders would be held responsible, even criminally liable, for these deaths.​

Except that you are forgetting that Israeli civilians are deliberately entering and illegally occupying land that is not theirs.
There almost are no Israeli civilians since anyone of age has mandatory IDF tour of duty.
And everyone in Israel is providing economic and material support, for crimes they are more than aware of.
Israelis are deliberately occupying stolen property, so are all criminals themselves.
Which means they are not innocent civilians in any way.
The attack by Hamas is not indiscriminate, and no matter the casualties, is warranted in order to reduce Palestinian casualties even more.

 

[Rigby5]

Bullshit

Learn to deal with facts and not expect media to be sycophants to your bias.

Instead they should be shills for your favorite ideologies? That's not how I see things.
Do you miss Pravda?

So, in your mind if the media isn't shilling for you bias it's shilling for someone else? s reporting of events and news ever not biased your sycophant's mind?

We know the media shills for the left and Muslim terrorists.

How can Muslims be "terrorists" when they are just defending their homelands?

Israel is not their homeland, moron.

WRONG!
Go read some history books.
Hebrew did not come from Palestine, but the Sinai.
Why do you think they went to Egypt for 400 years to escape a drought in the Sinai, if they came from Palestine, which never had a drought like that.
And why is it Palestine then was known of the Land of Canaan if it was the homeland of the Hebrew?
The Hebrew did invade around 1000 BC, but only ruled for a couple hundred years before being defeated and driven out by the Babylonians. They kept sneaking back, but were later defeated and driven out again and again, by the Assyrians and finally the Romans
The Hebrew never belonged there and were always illegal, brutal, invaders.
And they again were illegal foreign invaders in 1948.
They do not belong there.
It is NOT their homeland and never was.

Counter argument since YOU OFFERED NO LINKS...JUST your guesses.
Why is it so difficult to provide sources? As a result I assume you are guessing!

Israel's international "birth certificate" was validated by the promise of the Bible; uninterrupted Jewish settlement from the time of Joshua onward; the Balfour Declaration of 1917; the League of Nations Mandate, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration; the United Nations partition resolution of 1947; Israel's admission to the UN in 1949; the recognition of Israel by most other states; and, most of all, the society created by Israel's people in decades of thriving, dynamic national existence.​

Jewish Claim To The Land Of Israel

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

That is easy to prove is lies.

First of all, lets establish that Joshua was a brutal invader who massacred the native Canaanite in Jerusalem, around 1000 BC.
Then lets prove the claim of uninterrupted Jewish settlement is a lie.
Did not the the Assyrians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 701 BC?
Did not the the Babylonians defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 587 BC?
Did not the the Romans defeat the Jews and force them all to leave in 70 AD?
Did not the Crusaders massacre any remaining Jews from 1099 on?

As for the Balfour Declaration, England did not own Palestine at the time, so was invalid.
But it never intended or gave any hint of Jewish ownership, only facilitated immigration.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

And as for who does own Palestine, I suggest you refer to the Treaty of San Remo and Treaty of Sevres, which legally created the Moslem Palestine as agreed by the British for helping the Allies in WWI.
The British Mandate for Palestine was not a whim, but a contractual obligation to the Arab Moslems.

And finally, the hundreds of war crime resolution by the UN against Israel invalidate it utterly.
There has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel.

Where are you FACTS supporting your personal opinion such as "there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...

Question for you:
Would you consider a country that committed the following as more criminally than Israel?

Indeed, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the literary giant who wrote harrowingly about the Soviet gulag system, claimed the true number of Stalin’s victims might have been as high as 60 million.

How Many People Did Joseph Stalin Kill?

Most reputed scholars and historians estimate that the number of people Stalin killed ranges from between 20 and 60 million.

www.ibtimes.com

Or how about this country:
From 1958 to 1962, his Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of up to 45 million people – easily making it the biggest episode of mass murder ever recorded.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/08/03/giving-historys-greatest-mass-murderer-his-due/

Now why should ANY ONE believe anything you write because right with this stupidly ignorant statement you show that anything you write is totally biased. Totally ignorant. AND truly unsubstantiated.
Compared to 100 million killed by Stalin/Mao i.e Communists which evidently (YOU ARE)... where do you get off on saying ""there has hardly ever been such a criminal country as Israel"...
Don't you see that anyone who reads that and knows history will say that guy is crazy!

This asshole believes "Palestine" is a real country but Israel isn't.

The natives are Palestinian, while the Zionists are all illegal immigrants, mostly from Poland and Russia.
Palestine was made in 1920 by world treaty and legal obligation.
Israel was created essentially by Truman's unilateral fiat in 1949.

There's no such country as Palestine, and the people who claim they are Palestinian are almost entirely from somewhere else.

That makes no sense.
Palestine, (AKA the Land of Canaan, the Levant, etc.,) is always described as the most popular and densely populated in the entire Mideast.
The Oranges of Jaffa were world famous in the 1800s.
In 1922 the census says 3/4 of a million Palestinians, with only 4% being Jewish.
(It actually would have been higher total, but WWI and disease brought it down.)
So then how could 3/4 of a million Palestinian, mostly Moslem, not be a Palestine in 1922?
Especially since Palestine had just been legally mandated by treaty in 1920?

Canaan is one thing, and Palestine was another. The later was a creation of the United Nations. It wasn't a country.

You wouldn't ask questions like you did if you had simply read the facts. There has never been a country called Palestine. The territory the UN put Britain in charge of was divided up into Israel and Jordan. The so-called "Palestinians" are actually Jordanians.

Wrong.
Palestine was created by the League of Nations, the Treaty of San Remo, the Treaty of Sevres, and the Allies from WWI, in 1920.
That was before the UN was created in 1945.
The UN had nothing to do with creating Palestine in 1920.

The British were mandated only to create an Arab Palestine, and there is no legal basis for Israel.
Read the Churchill Whitepaper of 1922.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922

avalon.law.yale.edu

{...
Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.
...}

Your article only supports what I've been saying.

No it does not.
It says that Palestine is to be Arab and Moslem, but that Jews are to be allowed immigration as long as they stay below the limit.
There is never to be a Jewish state.

Wrong, idiot:

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab deegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.'​

A Jewish home means facilitated immigration.
It does not mean a state religion.
It clearly says the home for Jews would be within the greater Arab Moslem Palestine.
Which at this time was 95% Arab Moslem..

Read the next sentence:
{,,, It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government. ...}
The Jews were only being granted such liberal immigration because they had vowed to have no part in the government of Palestine.
There was to be no Israel.
The Jews were lying and always intended to steal all of Palestine.

Spare us. I've had enough of your weaseling about delusional Palestinians and their imaginary homeland.

Wrong.
I have well documented the proof of Palestine's legal creation in 1920.

No nation called Palestine was created in 1920, moron.

Oh, then why were the British given the British Mandate for Palestine in 1920?
A mandate means the British were to train the Palestine government to be able to survive on its own, with independence.

But wait, you said Palestine became a nation in 1920. You sound very confused.

YES!
Palestine officially existed in boundary and definition as a sovereign entity in 1920.
But it did not yet have a government.
That is why the British were mandated to protect and train the Palestinians until they could defend themselves.

No it didn't. How could it be "sovereign" when the British government made the law there?

Same thing when any country is liberated during a war and its invader removed.
Temporarily a military commission rules.
But that does not alter the sovereign entity and rights, it just means its civilian government has not yet been prepared to take back over.

It was never a country, turd. There was never any "civilian government."

Of course there was a country.
A "Mandate" is for an independent country, and nothing else.
The problem is that the Zionists blew up the British high command in Palestine, and the British then wanted out without finishing their mandate.

Sorry, turd, but the term "mandate" didn't exist until after WW I. What it really means is that area was British teritory. Suppossedly there were suppose to manage it until it was decided how to allocate it.

Yes it did.
The word mandate has always been around n terms of geopolitics.
It means territory that has officially been assigned in some way.
It means the British could NOT just do whatever they wanted to with it.

{...
mandate
[ˈmanˌdāt]

NOUN

1. an official order or commission to do something.
   "a mandate to seek the release of political prisoners"
   synonyms:
   instruction · directive · direction · decree · command · order · injunction · edict·
   [more]
2. the authority to carry out a policy or course of action, regarded as given by the electorate to a candidate or party that is victorious in an election.
   "a sick leader living beyond his mandate"
   synonyms:
   authority · approval · acceptance · ratification · indorsement · sanction · authorization

VERB

1. give (someone) authority to act in a certain way.
   "other colleges have mandated coed fraternities"
   synonyms:
   authorize · commission · depute · appoint · nominate · name · empower · charge · choose · select · designate · elect · detail
2. historical
   assign (territory) under a mandate of the League of Nations.
   "mandated territories"
   ...}

Here is the definition of the term in the way the signatories to the League of Nations meant it.

​

Historical​

assign (territory) under a mandate of the League of Nations.​

"mandated territories"​

Yes, and what were the British assigned to do in Palestine?
They were mandated to prepare the Arab natives for independence.
The British did not capture Palestine from the Ottoman Empire, the Palestinians did.
So there is no way the British had any claims on Palestine.
Instead it was the opposite, that they had a responsibility to pay back the Palestinians for their help.

 

[Rigby5]

For some reason I can't cut/paste from this link, but it shows the Zionists were at fault for the conflict and were not supposed to get sovereignty.

British Mandate of Palestine- a Complete Overview

British Mandate of Palestine- the Shaw Commission suggested partition as a solution to the conflicts as it recognized two incongruous societies...

www.wise2wisdom.org

Specifically why they were at fault is that they illegally flooded Palestine with more than 10 times the legal quota, and illegally murdered the British high command in the King David Hotel bombing.
They were immigrants so had no rights to the land, while the Palestinians did have rights as natives.

Of course it shows the supposed "Zionists" were at fault because it's a leftwing blog.

Isn't that a little confusing, because Jews generally are left wing liberals and strict Moslems always more right wing?

Your bulshit doen't confuse me at all. If Moslems are "right-wing" then why are Democrats always defending them?

A liberal would defend inherent native rights regardless if they like them or not.
For example, liberals are not going to like the strict ways Moslems are going to treat gays, women, etc.
But a liberal puts native autonomy as the highest priority, over subjective desires.
A conservative should as well.
It does not matter what one wants or likes.
The point is Palestinians have an inherent right of self determination that the Russian and Polish, immigrant, Zionists just can not have.

Israel is just an ancient myth being manipulated by modern con-men from Poland and Russia.
The original Israel was horrific, massacring Canaanites women and children when they invaded Jericho.
The original Israel was utterly destroyed and greatly deserved being destroyed.
The modern Israel has absolutely no connection, and even if it did, it would not justify anything.

 

[bripat9643]

You people are remarkably forgiving of the only other country in the world that can make the decision that America will go to war.

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…​

Israel obliterates Gaza headquarters of AP and Al Jazeera… Boom and it’s gone…

UPDATE “After Operation Protective Edge in 2014, former AP reporter Matti Friedman wrote in The Atlantic: “Hamas understood that reporters could be intimidated when necessary and that they w…

citizenfreepress.com

Just wait... Biden and his infidel believers will criticize Israel just as

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building​

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli air strike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.
Reporters for AP and Al Jazeera were forced to evacuate the 12-story building after the owner was warned that it would be targeted. Israeli forces struck the building an hour later, causing it to completely collapse.

Press advocates condemn Israeli missile strike on media building

The Associated Press, Al Jazeera and other press advocates condemned the Israeli airstrike on Saturday that blew up the building housing them and other media outlets.AP President and CEO Gary Pruit…

thehill.com

By the way... has Hamas given anyone warnings about these attacks?

IMRA - Sunday, April 18, 2004 A Chronology of Terrorist Attacks Carried out by Hamas Since September 2000

www.imra.org.il

Well, the Israelis have done this sort of stuff for 70 years.

You mean attack their enemies? That's why we admire them.

Israelis attacked the worshippers at AlAqsa.. They engineered this fight so they could kill more Palestinians.

No, they didn't. More propaganda. Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque. The western narrative is a joke. Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets. Hamas needs to be annihilated.

Right proof

Hamas had staged the weapons inside the mosque.... Proof...

Hamas started this by firing off more than 1500 rockets.... Prove that Hamas actually did this and it wasn't Jihad...

Wrong.
There is no proof of any weapons from mosques, schools, hospitals, or any other questionable source.
The recent rockets were more than justified retaliation over the recent murder and land confiscations.

Sorry don't believe anything you write! NO substantiation! NO LINKS! ONLY your subjective and personalized opinion!

Liar.
I have quoted and linked more than anyone else on this board.
I am also right.

Right there! If you did you'd provide the numbers and links! Where is THAT proof of your statement? You proved the point ...AGAIN!!!
Total liar when you say that! Prove it!

Prove what?
You claim some sort of Hamas war crime, but there is no Hamas war crime.
Retaliation with rockets is perfectly legal when Israel murder, arrests, and confiscates.
Israel has no right to any of the West Bank.

Hamas deliberately launched rockets into civilian areas. There were no military targets. That's defined by the Geneva Convention as a war crime.

Wrong.
The US routinely bombed civilian areas in WWII.
That is not illegal if that is the best anyone could do under the circumstances.
You are allowed to attack economic support for example.
That is why in WWII they were allowed to attack German food production with the "Damn Buster" bombs.
Flooding fields is not a military target either.

That's true, moron, but that section of the Geneva accords was adopted after WW II specifically for that reason.

Aerial bombardment and international law - Wikipedia

In 1977, Protocol I was adopted as an amendment to the Geneva Conventions, prohibiting the deliberate or indiscriminate attack of civilians and civilian objects, even if the area contained military objectives, and the attacking force must take precautions and steps to spare the lives of civilians and civilian objects as possible. However, forces occupying near densely populated areas must avoid locating military objectives near or in densely populated areas and endeavor to remove civilians from the vicinity of military objectives. Failure to do so would cause a higher civilian death toll resulting from bombardment by the attacking force and the defenders would be held responsible, even criminally liable, for these deaths.​

Except that you are forgetting that Israeli civilians are deliberately entering and illegally occupying land that is not theirs.

That's totally irrelevant to the fact that Hamas is violating the Geneva convention.

There almost are no Israeli civilians since anyone of age has mandatory IDF tour of duty.

ROFL! That is the lamest excuse of the month.

And everyone in Israel is providing economic and material support, for crimes they are more than aware of.

Such as?

Israelis are deliberately occupying stolen property, so are all criminals themselves.
Which means they are not innocent civilians in any way.
The attack by Hamas is not indiscriminate, and no matter the casualties, is warranted in order to reduce Palestinian casualties even more.

Sorry, turd, but the fact that you claim Israel did something wrong doesn't mean those bloodthirsty savages in Hamas get to commit war crimes.