Israel - The national state of the Jewish people.

[montelatici]

I said the Jews attacked Christians and Mulims and their villages before the Partition plan was approved. Plan Dalet was begun by 1 December 1947. The Jews were expelling the non-Jews before the Mandate ended, 15 May 1948.

Monti , there was another war during this time called the Mandatory Palestine Civil War. BOTH sides were attacking each other, but you make it seem like only Jews were attacking people. THAT is what I'm talking about when I accuse you of being an expert propagandist ...

...and jews in the MENA were being attacked throughout history. Pogroms and massacres of jews in the 1800's. Attacks and kills began well before the Palestine Mandatory Civil War.
Jews did not begin the fighting or killings, they were not armed till the WWs as part of the British and other armies. After the Holocaust they armed themselves so such genocide against could never happen again.

Before the European Jews began invading Palestine there were no attacks on Jews in the 1800s? The Christians and Muslims were simply trying to prevent their massacre and ethnic cleansing at the hands of the Jews. The Zionists were clear about wanting to create a Jewish state on land that Christians and Muslims had been living on for many centuries. What should Christians and Muslims have done? Built houses for the Jews and just leave their lands and give them to the Jews?

 

[montelatici]

I said the Jews attacked Christians and Mulims and their villages before the Partition plan was approved. Plan Dalet was begun by 1 December 1947. The Jews were expelling the non-Jews before the Mandate ended, 15 May 1948.

Monti , there was another war during this time called the Mandatory Palestine Civil War. BOTH sides were attacking each other, but you make it seem like only Jews were attacking people. THAT is what I'm talking about when I accuse you of being an expert propagandist ...

...and jews in the MENA were being attacked throughout history. Pogroms and massacres of jews in the 1800's. Attacks and kills began well before the Palestine Mandatory Civil War.
Jews did not begin the fighting or killings, they were not armed till the WWs as part of the British and other armies. After the Holocaust they armed themselves so such genocide against could never happen again.

Yes but poor Monti cannot handle the truth

I wonder why. He seems a fanatic about it. A dog with a bone.

I just present the facts in contrast to the propaganda Israel Firsters parrot.

 

[toastman]

I said the Jews attacked Christians and Mulims and their villages before the Partition plan was approved. Plan Dalet was begun by 1 December 1947. The Jews were expelling the non-Jews before the Mandate ended, 15 May 1948.

Monti , there was another war during this time called the Mandatory Palestine Civil War. BOTH sides were attacking each other, but you make it seem like only Jews were attacking people. THAT is what I'm talking about when I accuse you of being an expert propagandist ...

...and jews in the MENA were being attacked throughout history. Pogroms and massacres of jews in the 1800's. Attacks and kills began well before the Palestine Mandatory Civil War.
Jews did not begin the fighting or killings, they were not armed till the WWs as part of the British and other armies. After the Holocaust they armed themselves so such genocide against could never happen again.

Yes but poor Monti cannot handle the truth

I wonder why. He seems a fanatic about it. A dog with a bone.

I just present the facts in contrast to the propaganda Israel Firsters parrot.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! Ya, sure you do. Like the facts I just dismantled Monti, those facts?

You present lies, propaganda, bullshit, more propaganda, more lies, more propaganda and so forth. That's what happens when you are a brainwashed person

 

[montelatici]

You dismantled nothing. You can repeat lies to yourself and you can even believe them if it makes you feel better. But I have presented fact you present fiction. No amount of HAHAHAing will make it true, son.

 

[toastman]

You dismantled nothing. You can repeat lies to yourself and you can even believe them if it makes you feel better. But I have presented fact you present fiction. No amount of HAHAHAing will make it true, son.

Sure I did. I also made you look like a fool in the process. I COMPLETELY destroyed all your bullshit claims, but you're too much of a baby to admit it.

If you'd like, we can go to another part of the forum where there are no bias posters, present our arguments for our claims, and the non bias posters can tell us who won...

 

[Mindful]

I said the Jews attacked Christians and Mulims and their villages before the Partition plan was approved. Plan Dalet was begun by 1 December 1947. The Jews were expelling the non-Jews before the Mandate ended, 15 May 1948.

Monti , there was another war during this time called the Mandatory Palestine Civil War. BOTH sides were attacking each other, but you make it seem like only Jews were attacking people. THAT is what I'm talking about when I accuse you of being an expert propagandist ...

...and jews in the MENA were being attacked throughout history. Pogroms and massacres of jews in the 1800's. Attacks and kills began well before the Palestine Mandatory Civil War.
Jews did not begin the fighting or killings, they were not armed till the WWs as part of the British and other armies. After the Holocaust they armed themselves so such genocide against could never happen again.

Yes but poor Monti cannot handle the truth

I wonder why. He seems a fanatic about it. A dog with a bone.

I just present the facts in contrast to the propaganda Israel Firsters parrot.

Whatever it is you think you are doing, you are fanatical about it.

You think you are convincing us of something?

 

[Phoenall]

....
Would that be the same Nick Griffin that spoke out against ISLAMONAZI TERRORISM when 11 and 12 year old girls were being raped and prostituted by muslims. The same Nick Griffin that went to Syria to see exactly what was going on, and came back with a report of how the insurgents were the ones mass murdering innocents and the UN and NATO should not bomb the government forces.

And by the way he does not deny the holocaust he questions certain aspects of it that led to the state murder of innocent men and women after being convicted on no evidence at all.

Well thanks for confirming that you have a hardon for Nick - struggling-for-relevance-and-a-seat-on-the-EU-gravy-train - Griffin. He is hoping to champion Islamiphobia, and finds himself strangely allied to his other object of hate: But at least Israelis are Europeans, eh?

Griffin is the failed leader of a failed quazi-fascist party which has fallen foul of so many court cases it is all but shut. Most of its aficionados live off the dole, with a bit of fencing stolen goods and drug dealing on the side. Which are you?

As to his attempt to modernise: I expect he was hoping for some of that Hasbara money that the EDL somehow accessed. As to "questioning parts of the Holocaust" his biggest question was: "Why didn't they complete the job?"

I suppose you are here with your race hatred wondering why it was your hatred was not as successful as Israeli fascism? Suck it up lardy, and open another pack of Bombay flavoured crisps.

Wrong again as I don't like seeing lies posted, and the BNP were found not guilty of being racist weren't they, just as Nick Griffin was. You can of course produce evidence of your libellous claims that BNP members are all unemployed fencing stolen goods. Many happen to be working or retired and see the BNP as the only solution until UKIP came along. The majority of British people are sick of immigrants and want an end to the problems they cause, they also want a stop bringing to Islamic terrorism and violence in this country. Your abuse does not work anymore because I have had 10 years of it from better people than you, and at least the BNP does not rape children unlike your muslims and neo Marxists that you defend.

Hmmm.
You are on to a loser on this one Phoney.
If you think an organisation can have someone like this creating policy and NOT be racist, then you must have taken up residence in Cloud Cuckoo Land. Do they have lax border control there too then?

"1. Nick Griffin is a convicted racist who said Hitler 'went a bit too far'

The man who will achieve a first for the extreme right-wing in Britain by taking his place on the BBC's flagship debating programme tomorrow is a convicted racist who once said that Hitler "went a bit too far" and fraternised with the former leader of the Ku Klux Klan.

Since attending his first National Front meeting at the age of 15, the privately educated leader of the British National Party has been imbued with the doctrine and practice of the far right from an early age. He read 'Mein Kampf' when he was 13.

The 50-year-old father-of-four has been assiduous in recent years to distance his party from the thuggish, neo-fascist image of the extreme right. But his insistence that neither he nor his party are racist sits uneasily with his past. In 1998, he was convicted of inciting racial hatred for articles that denied the Holocaust and given a suspended nine-month prison term. While in the witness box, he said: "I am well aware that the orthodox opinion is that six million Jews were gassed and cremated and turned into lampshades. Orthodox opinion also once held that the world is flat." "

10 things you should know about the BNP when you watch Question Time tonight - UK Politics - UK - The Independent

So what was the result of the court case brought against Nick Griffin then when he was arrested for protesting about the systematic racist rape of 11 and 12 year old schoolgirls by muslim men ?

And maybe you can answer one question for me how many Jews were gassed in Belsen Bergen in one night according 1945 Orthodox opinion ?

 

[Phoenall]

I'm sure that any law that places Jewish law and Jews above us goyim is fine with you.

LINK that proves your claim from a non partisan source

 

[montelatici]

You dismantled nothing. You can repeat lies to yourself and you can even believe them if it makes you feel better. But I have presented fact you present fiction. No amount of HAHAHAing will make it true, son.

Sure I did. I also made you look like a fool in the process. I COMPLETELY destroyed all your bullshit claims, but you're too much of a baby to admit it.

If you'd like, we can go to another part of the forum where there are no bias posters, present our arguments for our claims, and the non bias posters can tell us who won...

I don't come here to win or lose. I just post the facts to contrast the decades of promulgation of Israeli and Zionist propaganda, intended for Americans.

I don't make claims, I just deal in facts as reported in source documents and on occasion make a logical deduction, i.e. it is obvious that had the European Zionists not gone to Palestine with the intention of creating a Jewish state at the expense of the Christians and Muslims, there would not have been any violence against them on the part of the Christians and Muslims. No one can call it a claim, it is a fact.

 

[toastman]

You dismantled nothing. You can repeat lies to yourself and you can even believe them if it makes you feel better. But I have presented fact you present fiction. No amount of HAHAHAing will make it true, son.

Sure I did. I also made you look like a fool in the process. I COMPLETELY destroyed all your bullshit claims, but you're too much of a baby to admit it.

If you'd like, we can go to another part of the forum where there are no bias posters, present our arguments for our claims, and the non bias posters can tell us who won...

I don't come here to win or lose. I just post the facts to contrast the decades of promulgation of Israeli and Zionist propaganda, intended for Americans.

I don't make claims, I just deal in facts as reported in source documents and on occasion make a logical deduction, i.e. it is obvious that had the European Zionists not gone to Palestine with the intention of creating a Jewish state at the expense of the Christians and Muslims, there would not have been any violence against them on the part of the Christians and Muslims. No one can call it a claim, it is a fact.

The problem is, you did not post any links to back up your fact. I did.

I posted all the attacks against Jews that preceded any attack against Arabs. You cannot refute that. It's that simple. No matter how hard you try to beat around the bush, facts still remain facts.
I figured you would be too scared to have our claims judged by non biased posters, since you know I am right and you are wrong.

 

[montelatici]

You dismantled nothing. You can repeat lies to yourself and you can even believe them if it makes you feel better. But I have presented fact you present fiction. No amount of HAHAHAing will make it true, son.

Sure I did. I also made you look like a fool in the process. I COMPLETELY destroyed all your bullshit claims, but you're too much of a baby to admit it.

If you'd like, we can go to another part of the forum where there are no bias posters, present our arguments for our claims, and the non bias posters can tell us who won...

I don't come here to win or lose. I just post the facts to contrast the decades of promulgation of Israeli and Zionist propaganda, intended for Americans.

I don't make claims, I just deal in facts as reported in source documents and on occasion make a logical deduction, i.e. it is obvious that had the European Zionists not gone to Palestine with the intention of creating a Jewish state at the expense of the Christians and Muslims, there would not have been any violence against them on the part of the Christians and Muslims. No one can call it a claim, it is a fact.

The problem is, you did not post any links to back up your fact. I did.

I posted all the attacks against Jews that preceded any attack against Arabs. You cannot refute that. It's that simple. No matter how hard you try to beat around the bush, facts still remain facts.
I figured you would be too scared to have our claims judged by non biased posters, since you know I am right and you are wrong.

There is no beating around the bush, the European Jews went to Palestine to create a Jewish state. That is the origin of the conflict, the first attack. That's just logic, it does not require a link. Just as it does not require a link to understand that the arrival of the Europeans to the New World started the conflict with the Native Americans. Of course the local people would resist the European Zionist goal of creating a Jewish state in the land they had lived in for centuries.

 

[montelatici]

I'm sure that any law that places Jewish law and Jews above us goyim is fine with you.

LINK that proves your claim from a non partisan source

Who needs a link? By Israeli law, someone of the Jewish religion can immigrate to Israel without any problem while Christian or Muslim Arabs whose ancestors lived and owned most of the land in Israel cannot. That's just one law.

 

[aris2chat]

Jews Are a 'Race,' Genes Reveal
forward.com/articles/155742/jews-are-a-race-genes-reveal/

Author Uncovers DNA Links Between Members of Tribe

montage kurt hoffman


By Jon Entine
Published May 04, 2012, issue of May 11, 2012.

• Single Page

Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People
By Harry Ostrer
Oxford University Press, 288 Pages, $24.95

In his new book, “Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People,” Harry Ostrer, a medical geneticist and professor at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, claims that Jews are different, and the differences are not just skin deep. Jews exhibit, he writes, a distinctive genetic signature. Considering that the Nazis tried to exterminate Jews based on their supposed racial distinctiveness, such a conclusion might be a cause for concern. But Ostrer sees it as central to Jewish identity.

“Who is a Jew?” has been a poignant question for Jews throughout our history. It evokes a complex tapestry of Jewish identity made up of different strains of religious beliefs, cultural practices and blood ties to ancient Palestine and modern Israel. But the question, with its echoes of genetic determinism, also has a dark side.

Geneticists have long been aware that certain diseases, from breast cancer to Tay-Sachs, disproportionately affect Jews. Ostrer, who is also director of genetic and genomic testing at Montefiore Medical Center, goes further, maintaining that Jews are a homogeneous group with all the scientific trappings of what we used to call a “race.”

Related
For most of the 3,000-year history of the Jewish people, the notion of what came to be known as “Jewish exceptionalism” was hardly controversial. Because of our history of inmarriage and cultural isolation, imposed or self-selected, Jews were considered by gentiles (and usually referred to themselves) as a “race.” Scholars from Josephus to Disraeli proudly proclaimed their membership in “the tribe.”

Ostrer explains how this concept took on special meaning in the 20th century, as genetics emerged as a viable scientific enterprise. Jewish distinctiveness might actually be measurable empirically. In “Legacy,” he first introduces us to Maurice Fishberg, an upwardly mobile Russian-Jewish immigrant to New York at the fin de siècle. Fishberg fervently embraced the anthropological fashion of the era, measuring skull sizes to explain why Jews seemed to be afflicted with more diseases than other groups — what he called the “peculiarities of the comparative pathology of the Jews.” It turns out that Fishberg and his contemporary phrenologists were wrong: Skull shape provides limited information about human differences. But his studies ushered in a century of research linking Jews to genetics.

Ostrer divides his book into six chapters representing the various aspects of Jewishness: Looking Jewish, Founders, Genealogies, Tribes, Traits and Identity. Each chapter features a prominent scientist or historical figure who dramatically advanced our understanding of Jewishness. The snippets of biography lighten a dense forest of sometimes-obscure science. The narrative, which consists of a lot of potboiler history, is a slog at times. But for the specialist and anyone touched by the enduring debate over Jewish identity, this book is indispensable.

“Legacy” may cause its readers discomfort. To some Jews, the notion of a genetically related people is an embarrassing remnant of early Zionism that came into vogue at the height of the Western obsession with race, in the late 19th century. Celebrating blood ancestry is divisive, they claim: The authors of “The Bell Curve” were vilified 15 years ago for suggesting that genes play a major role in IQ differences among racial groups.

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

Around and around we go!

There is no beating around the bush, the European Jews went to Palestine to create a Jewish state. That is the origin of the conflict, the first attack.

(COMMENT)

There was no "attack." This is pure drama queen talk.

"Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country;" (Preamble - Mandate of Palestine)​

The origin of the conflict rests within the context that the hostile Arabs in "the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by" the Principal Allied Powers did not have a say in the matter. And in the face of the decision, beyond their control, gradually escalated the level of conflict in an effort to undermine the decisions made by the Principal Allied Powers (San Remo Conference decided on April 24, 1920) and the selected Mandatory (having full powers of legislation and of administration).

That's just logic, it does not require a link.

(COMMENT)

Well, you are making an accusation that needs some sort of substantiation and explanation.

• (QUESTION) Who did the "European Jews" attack?
  • (ANSWER) No one. The immigration of Jews to the Mandate of Palestine was in accordance with the decisions made at the San Remo Conference and articulated in Articles #4 and #6 of the Mandate.

"It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home."

"The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes."​

Just as it does not require a link to understand that the arrival of the Europeans to the New World started the conflict with the Native Americans. Of course the local people would resist the European Zionist goal of creating a Jewish state in the land they had lived in for centuries.

(COMMENT)

While it may initially sound like there is a correlation between the European conquest of the New World and the territorial administration of territories surrendered by the Ottoman/Turkish Empire at the end of WWI, there is not. The European conquest of the New World was a true expansionist program and colonization effort by World Powers in which they derived resources, revenue and influence; direct benefits form the extended establishment. In contrast, the establishment of the Jewish National Home in the Mandate of Palestine was to benefit a third party culture and to develop a safe haven for the protection and preservation of the Jewish People.

The original Arab Leadership associated with the Allied Powers, understood the nationalist direction of both the Jewish People and that of the Arab Community. This was made abundantly clear in the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement of 1919, in which:

"His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ, and Dr. CHAIM WE1ZMANN, representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation, mindful of the racial kindship and ancient bonds existing between the Arabs and the Jewish people, and realising that the surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine, and being desirous further of confirming the good understanding which exists between them, have agreed upon the following Articles:" - See more at: Faisal-Weizmann Agreement​

This Agreement was made on the basis of a promise (from the UK) that the Emir Faisal would receive an independent Kingdom; which he ultimately did in the form of Iraq.

(POINT OF CLARIFICATION)

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (as it is called today) has been in progress for nearly a Century, with little progress towards peace. And the conflict, enduring all this time, has lost sight of what it is all about. It has become muddled and confused over the years. Let's put it back on track. It is a territorial dispute on Arab Sovereignty --- in its reduced form.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[toastman]

You dismantled nothing. You can repeat lies to yourself and you can even believe them if it makes you feel better. But I have presented fact you present fiction. No amount of HAHAHAing will make it true, son.

Sure I did. I also made you look like a fool in the process. I COMPLETELY destroyed all your bullshit claims, but you're too much of a baby to admit it.

If you'd like, we can go to another part of the forum where there are no bias posters, present our arguments for our claims, and the non bias posters can tell us who won...

I don't come here to win or lose. I just post the facts to contrast the decades of promulgation of Israeli and Zionist propaganda, intended for Americans.

I don't make claims, I just deal in facts as reported in source documents and on occasion make a logical deduction, i.e. it is obvious that had the European Zionists not gone to Palestine with the intention of creating a Jewish state at the expense of the Christians and Muslims, there would not have been any violence against them on the part of the Christians and Muslims. No one can call it a claim, it is a fact.

The problem is, you did not post any links to back up your fact. I did.

I posted all the attacks against Jews that preceded any attack against Arabs. You cannot refute that. It's that simple. No matter how hard you try to beat around the bush, facts still remain facts.
I figured you would be too scared to have our claims judged by non biased posters, since you know I am right and you are wrong.

There is no beating around the bush, the European Jews went to Palestine to create a Jewish state. That is the origin of the conflict, the first attack. That's just logic, it does not require a link. Just as it does not require a link to understand that the arrival of the Europeans to the New World started the conflict with the Native Americans. Of course the local people would resist the European Zionist goal of creating a Jewish state in the land they had lived in for centuries.

The desire to create a state that the people who controlled the land promised is an attack ? Way to make a fool of yourself, again. That's in the top 3 of dumbest things you've ever posted. The first attacks were Arabs massacring Jews, no matter how much you try say otherwise Monti. Give up already, you're exhausting yourself trying every propaganda technique to back up your lies, but you're failing every time.

 

[montelatici]

montelatici, et al,

Around and around we go!

There is no beating around the bush, the European Jews went to Palestine to create a Jewish state. That is the origin of the conflict, the first attack.

(COMMENT)

There was no "attack." This is pure drama queen talk.

"Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country;" (Preamble - Mandate of Palestine)​

The origin of the conflict rests within the context that the hostile Arabs in "the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by" the Principal Allied Powers did not have a say in the matter. And in the face of the decision, beyond their control, gradually escalated the level of conflict in an effort to undermine the decisions made by the Principal Allied Powers (San Remo Conference decided on April 24, 1920) and the selected Mandatory (having full powers of legislation and of administration).

That's just logic, it does not require a link.

(COMMENT)

Well, you are making an accusation that needs some sort of substantiation and explanation.

• (QUESTION) Who did the "European Jews" attack?
  • (ANSWER) No one. The immigration of Jews to the Mandate of Palestine was in accordance with the decisions made at the San Remo Conference and articulated in Articles #4 and #6 of the Mandate.

"It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home."

"The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes."​

Just as it does not require a link to understand that the arrival of the Europeans to the New World started the conflict with the Native Americans. Of course the local people would resist the European Zionist goal of creating a Jewish state in the land they had lived in for centuries.

(COMMENT)

While it may initially sound like there is a correlation between the European conquest of the New World and the territorial administration of territories surrendered by the Ottoman/Turkish Empire at the end of WWI, there is not. The European conquest of the New World was a true expansionist program and colonization effort by World Powers in which they derived resources, revenue and influence; direct benefits form the extended establishment. In contrast, the establishment of the Jewish National Home in the Mandate of Palestine was to benefit a third party culture and to develop a safe haven for the protection and preservation of the Jewish People.

The original Arab Leadership associated with the Allied Powers, understood the nationalist direction of both the Jewish People and that of the Arab Community. This was made abundantly clear in the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement of 1919, in which:

"His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ, and Dr. CHAIM WE1ZMANN, representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation, mindful of the racial kindship and ancient bonds existing between the Arabs and the Jewish people, and realising that the surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine, and being desirous further of confirming the good understanding which exists between them, have agreed upon the following Articles:" - See more at: Faisal-Weizmann Agreement​

This Agreement was made on the basis of a promise (from the UK) that the Emir Faisal would receive an independent Kingdom; which he ultimately did in the form of Iraq.

(POINT OF CLARIFICATION)

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (as it is called today) has been in progress for nearly a Century, with little progress towards peace. And the conflict, enduring all this time, has lost sight of what it is all about. It has become muddled and confused over the years. Let's put it back on track. It is a territorial dispute on Arab Sovereignty --- in its reduced form.

Most Respectfully,
R

If the European Zionists hadn't gone to Palestine, there would be no conflict between the European Jews and the indigenous Christians and Muslims of Palestine. Just a fact Rocco the Terrone.

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

Well this is really a commentary on an "alternate reality."

If the European Zionists hadn't gone to Palestine, there would be no conflict between the European Jews and the indigenous Christians and Muslims of Palestine. Just a fact Rocco the Terrone.

(COMMENT)

First, Israel was not just populated by the immigration by "European" Jews. Jewish people came from and continue to come from all over the world to join the indigenous Jews.

Your statement also presupposes that, absent the Arab-Israeli Conflict, that there "would be no conflict." But in fact, the Arab World is often in conflict. There were:

• Lebanese Civil War 1958 --- Conflict between Lebanon's Christian and Muslim
• Lebanese Civil War 1974 --- 1990
• Syrian-Jordanian-Palestinian Conflict 1970 --- 1971: Syria sent an armored division into Jordan to reinforce the Palestinian forces under attack by Hussein's army.
• Anglo-Egyptian War of 1951-1952 (1951-1952) --- Egyptian guerrillas, aided by the government of Egypt, carried out a campaign against British forces stationed at the Suez Canal and against other British and Western symbols and targets.
• Egyptian-Libyan Border War of 1977

There is no evidence to suggest that the Arab or the Palestinian would not find some reason to fight each other. Currently there is the shadow of the Arab Spring for both Egypt and Syria. The Arab Spring in Syria has cost more than 191,000 Arab lives (Arab on Arab). That is more than the combined casualty numbers in the Arab-Israeli Conflict for the last quarter-Century.

The fact is, we cannot say, with any reasonableness, what your alternative history would have been like.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[aris2chat]

montelatici, et al,

Around and around we go!

There is no beating around the bush, the European Jews went to Palestine to create a Jewish state. That is the origin of the conflict, the first attack.

(COMMENT)

There was no "attack." This is pure drama queen talk.

"Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country;" (Preamble - Mandate of Palestine)​

The origin of the conflict rests within the context that the hostile Arabs in "the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by" the Principal Allied Powers did not have a say in the matter. And in the face of the decision, beyond their control, gradually escalated the level of conflict in an effort to undermine the decisions made by the Principal Allied Powers (San Remo Conference decided on April 24, 1920) and the selected Mandatory (having full powers of legislation and of administration).

That's just logic, it does not require a link.

(COMMENT)

Well, you are making an accusation that needs some sort of substantiation and explanation.

• (QUESTION) Who did the "European Jews" attack?
  • (ANSWER) No one. The immigration of Jews to the Mandate of Palestine was in accordance with the decisions made at the San Remo Conference and articulated in Articles #4 and #6 of the Mandate.

"It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home."

"The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes."​

Just as it does not require a link to understand that the arrival of the Europeans to the New World started the conflict with the Native Americans. Of course the local people would resist the European Zionist goal of creating a Jewish state in the land they had lived in for centuries.

(COMMENT)

While it may initially sound like there is a correlation between the European conquest of the New World and the territorial administration of territories surrendered by the Ottoman/Turkish Empire at the end of WWI, there is not. The European conquest of the New World was a true expansionist program and colonization effort by World Powers in which they derived resources, revenue and influence; direct benefits form the extended establishment. In contrast, the establishment of the Jewish National Home in the Mandate of Palestine was to benefit a third party culture and to develop a safe haven for the protection and preservation of the Jewish People.

The original Arab Leadership associated with the Allied Powers, understood the nationalist direction of both the Jewish People and that of the Arab Community. This was made abundantly clear in the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement of 1919, in which:

"His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ, and Dr. CHAIM WE1ZMANN, representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation, mindful of the racial kindship and ancient bonds existing between the Arabs and the Jewish people, and realising that the surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine, and being desirous further of confirming the good understanding which exists between them, have agreed upon the following Articles:" - See more at: Faisal-Weizmann Agreement​

This Agreement was made on the basis of a promise (from the UK) that the Emir Faisal would receive an independent Kingdom; which he ultimately did in the form of Iraq.

(POINT OF CLARIFICATION)

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (as it is called today) has been in progress for nearly a Century, with little progress towards peace. And the conflict, enduring all this time, has lost sight of what it is all about. It has become muddled and confused over the years. Let's put it back on track. It is a territorial dispute on Arab Sovereignty --- in its reduced form.

Most Respectfully,
R

If the European Zionists hadn't gone to Palestine, there would be no conflict between the European Jews and the indigenous Christians and Muslims of Palestine. Just a fact Rocco the Terrone.

Why are people hung up on jews who settled in Europe when they are only part of the jewish diaspora. Jews are still a people from the seed of Abraham. They take their heritage far more seriously that most westerners do. Genetically, historically, culturally and religiously they are all connected.

A Different Kind of Refugee
Written by Linda Gradstein
Published Monday, December 01, 2014

Jews From Arab Countries Want Recognition of Refugee Status


It may have been 47 years ago but Yossef Carasso remembers every detail of the night that he was taken to an Egyptian police station from his home in the city of Tanta, near Cairo. It was the first night of the 1967 war.

“We were the only Jewish family still left in Tanta and at 10 p.m. there was a knock on the door,” Carasso told The Media Line. “The policeman told my father, “We’re looking for your son and son-in-law. They took us to a police station and left us there all night.”

Carasso, who was not accused of any crime, was among 400 Jews who were imprisoned in Egypt at the start of the war when Egypt, along with Syria and Jordan attacked Israel. For six months, he says, his parents didn’t know if he was still alive. Finally he was allowed to write to them.

Two years later he was released, and the next day he and his family left Egypt, originally for France and then for Israel. According to Justice for Jews from Arab Countries (JJAC), almost 120,000 Jews left Egypt in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are only a few dozen Jews left in Egypt today.

This week, he attended a ceremony at Israeli President Reuven Rivlin’s residence, designating November 30 as the national day of commemoration of the plight of Jewish refugees from Arab lands and Iran. According to the United Nations, about 850,000 Jews left their homes in Arab countries, more than the 750,000 Palestinians who became refugees with the creation of the state of Israel in 1948. The largest number of Arab Jews came from Morocco, Algeria and Iraq. Today half of all Israelis have roots in Arab countries, and are known as Mizrahi (Eastern) Jews as opposed to Ashkenazi Jews from eastern Europe.

The national day hopes to raise awareness in both Israel and abroad about the culture of the Jews from Arab countries, as well as to begin a discussion of the issue of compensation for all of the property the Jews left behind.

“We have a whole history that even my children don’t know,” Sylvain Abitboul, the co-president of JJAC told The Media Line. “Everybody is always talking about the Palestinian refugees, but we want the world to know there is another set of refugees.”

Abitboul, who was born in Morocco, immigrated to Canada at age 18, and became an active member of the Jewish community in Montreal, including a stint as the past president of the Montreal Jewish Federation.

Many of the Jews from Arab countries left extensive property in their home countries before they emigrated. Abitboul says the estimate is that the total is $300 billion in today’s dollars. In 2000, then President Clinton suggested establishing a fund that would compensate both Palestinian and Jewish refugees.

At the ceremony, President Rivlin, whose own roots in Israel date back to the early 1800’s and who is a quintessential Ashkenazi Jew, said Israel needed to do more to integrate Mizrahi history and culture. For many years, the Ashkenazim were seen as the elite, and dominated educational and cultural institutions.

“We have come together today to make amends for a historical injustice, against a million Jews, immigrants from Arab countries and Iran, who stories were pushed to the margins of the Zionist narrative,” Rivlin told the crowd at his residence. “Indeed this comes too late, on too small a scale and no longer has an impact on public consciousness. Yet, still it is important to seek the correction, which should not be underestimated.”

Many of the attendees said that when they first came to Israel, they were embarrassed by their Arabic accents. Their parents were shunted off to peripheral areas in the country and low-paying jobs.

But recently there has been a renewed interest in Mizrachi culture, including music and food.

“It’s quite astonishing to see the revival of the culture in Israel,” Lyn Julius, the founder of Harif, the UK-based Association of Jews from the Middle East and North Africa told The Media Line. “The grandchildren of Jews from Arab and Muslim countries are becoming interested in their roots. It’s now harder to find a bagel than it is to find kubbeh (a Moroccan dish of fried dough stuffed with meat) in Israel.”

 

[toastman]

montelatici, et al,

Around and around we go!

There is no beating around the bush, the European Jews went to Palestine to create a Jewish state. That is the origin of the conflict, the first attack.

(COMMENT)

There was no "attack." This is pure drama queen talk.

"Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country;" (Preamble - Mandate of Palestine)​

The origin of the conflict rests within the context that the hostile Arabs in "the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by" the Principal Allied Powers did not have a say in the matter. And in the face of the decision, beyond their control, gradually escalated the level of conflict in an effort to undermine the decisions made by the Principal Allied Powers (San Remo Conference decided on April 24, 1920) and the selected Mandatory (having full powers of legislation and of administration).

That's just logic, it does not require a link.

(COMMENT)

Well, you are making an accusation that needs some sort of substantiation and explanation.

• (QUESTION) Who did the "European Jews" attack?
  • (ANSWER) No one. The immigration of Jews to the Mandate of Palestine was in accordance with the decisions made at the San Remo Conference and articulated in Articles #4 and #6 of the Mandate.

"It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home."

"The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes."​

Just as it does not require a link to understand that the arrival of the Europeans to the New World started the conflict with the Native Americans. Of course the local people would resist the European Zionist goal of creating a Jewish state in the land they had lived in for centuries.

(COMMENT)

While it may initially sound like there is a correlation between the European conquest of the New World and the territorial administration of territories surrendered by the Ottoman/Turkish Empire at the end of WWI, there is not. The European conquest of the New World was a true expansionist program and colonization effort by World Powers in which they derived resources, revenue and influence; direct benefits form the extended establishment. In contrast, the establishment of the Jewish National Home in the Mandate of Palestine was to benefit a third party culture and to develop a safe haven for the protection and preservation of the Jewish People.

The original Arab Leadership associated with the Allied Powers, understood the nationalist direction of both the Jewish People and that of the Arab Community. This was made abundantly clear in the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement of 1919, in which:

"His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ, and Dr. CHAIM WE1ZMANN, representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation, mindful of the racial kindship and ancient bonds existing between the Arabs and the Jewish people, and realising that the surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine, and being desirous further of confirming the good understanding which exists between them, have agreed upon the following Articles:" - See more at: Faisal-Weizmann Agreement​

This Agreement was made on the basis of a promise (from the UK) that the Emir Faisal would receive an independent Kingdom; which he ultimately did in the form of Iraq.

(POINT OF CLARIFICATION)

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (as it is called today) has been in progress for nearly a Century, with little progress towards peace. And the conflict, enduring all this time, has lost sight of what it is all about. It has become muddled and confused over the years. Let's put it back on track. It is a territorial dispute on Arab Sovereignty --- in its reduced form.

Most Respectfully,
R

If the European Zionists hadn't gone to Palestine, there would be no conflict between the European Jews and the indigenous Christians and Muslims of Palestine. Just a fact Rocco the Terrone.

Why are people hung up on jews who settled in Europe when they are only part of the jewish diaspora. Jews are still a people from the seed of Abraham. They take their heritage far more seriously that most westerners do. Genetically, historically, culturally and religiously they are all connected.

A Different Kind of Refugee
Written by Linda Gradstein
Published Monday, December 01, 2014

Jews From Arab Countries Want Recognition of Refugee Status


It may have been 47 years ago but Yossef Carasso remembers every detail of the night that he was taken to an Egyptian police station from his home in the city of Tanta, near Cairo. It was the first night of the 1967 war.

“We were the only Jewish family still left in Tanta and at 10 p.m. there was a knock on the door,” Carasso told The Media Line. “The policeman told my father, “We’re looking for your son and son-in-law. They took us to a police station and left us there all night.”

Carasso, who was not accused of any crime, was among 400 Jews who were imprisoned in Egypt at the start of the war when Egypt, along with Syria and Jordan attacked Israel. For six months, he says, his parents didn’t know if he was still alive. Finally he was allowed to write to them.

Two years later he was released, and the next day he and his family left Egypt, originally for France and then for Israel. According to Justice for Jews from Arab Countries (JJAC), almost 120,000 Jews left Egypt in the 1950’s and 60’s. There are only a few dozen Jews left in Egypt today.

This week, he attended a ceremony at Israeli President Reuven Rivlin’s residence, designating November 30 as the national day of commemoration of the plight of Jewish refugees from Arab lands and Iran. According to the United Nations, about 850,000 Jews left their homes in Arab countries, more than the 750,000 Palestinians who became refugees with the creation of the state of Israel in 1948. The largest number of Arab Jews came from Morocco, Algeria and Iraq. Today half of all Israelis have roots in Arab countries, and are known as Mizrahi (Eastern) Jews as opposed to Ashkenazi Jews from eastern Europe.

The national day hopes to raise awareness in both Israel and abroad about the culture of the Jews from Arab countries, as well as to begin a discussion of the issue of compensation for all of the property the Jews left behind.

“We have a whole history that even my children don’t know,” Sylvain Abitboul, the co-president of JJAC told The Media Line. “Everybody is always talking about the Palestinian refugees, but we want the world to know there is another set of refugees.”

Abitboul, who was born in Morocco, immigrated to Canada at age 18, and became an active member of the Jewish community in Montreal, including a stint as the past president of the Montreal Jewish Federation.

Many of the Jews from Arab countries left extensive property in their home countries before they emigrated. Abitboul says the estimate is that the total is $300 billion in today’s dollars. In 2000, then President Clinton suggested establishing a fund that would compensate both Palestinian and Jewish refugees.

At the ceremony, President Rivlin, whose own roots in Israel date back to the early 1800’s and who is a quintessential Ashkenazi Jew, said Israel needed to do more to integrate Mizrahi history and culture. For many years, the Ashkenazim were seen as the elite, and dominated educational and cultural institutions.

“We have come together today to make amends for a historical injustice, against a million Jews, immigrants from Arab countries and Iran, who stories were pushed to the margins of the Zionist narrative,” Rivlin told the crowd at his residence. “Indeed this comes too late, on too small a scale and no longer has an impact on public consciousness. Yet, still it is important to seek the correction, which should not be underestimated.”

Many of the attendees said that when they first came to Israel, they were embarrassed by their Arabic accents. Their parents were shunted off to peripheral areas in the country and low-paying jobs.

But recently there has been a renewed interest in Mizrachi culture, including music and food.

“It’s quite astonishing to see the revival of the culture in Israel,” Lyn Julius, the founder of Harif, the UK-based Association of Jews from the Middle East and North Africa told The Media Line. “The grandchildren of Jews from Arab and Muslim countries are becoming interested in their roots. It’s now harder to find a bagel than it is to find kubbeh (a Moroccan dish of fried dough stuffed with meat) in Israel.”

"Why are people hung up on jews who settled in Europe when they are only part of the jewish diaspora"

Because all Monti does is parrot the usual Palestinian propaganda. He never has a valid argument that he came up with himself. Then he runs around the forum saying that he only posts facts ...

 

[Roudy]

All this blabbering and yet, Israel exists as a nation and Palestine never did, and probably never will.