Palestinians Are Their Own Worst Enemy

[montelatici]

Can you believe this moron? One minute, he's spewing Palestinian propaganda, the next, he's claiming he only posts facts .

The fact is, non-Jews owned more than 85% of the land in 1946 and the Jews owned less than 7%. Now the Jews probably own more than 90% of the land and the non-Jews less than 10% I would estimate. How did the land go from non-Jews to Jews? Was it paid for? Were the non-Jews compensated in another way?

If not, what is it called when land is taken from someone without paying for it?

View attachment 34837


Name one item of Palestinian propaganda I have linked. Just one.

Not your links, it's what you say about Israel.

What does anything you just posted have to do with anything? Israel declared independence legally after following the steps prepatory to independence laid out by the U.N. The West Bank is a different story.

So, they had the right to take land from the rightful owners? Have you ever heard of a UN action that sanctioned the taking of land from the owners without compensation?

What do you call taking land from the owners without compensation?

Now THAT'S funny! Israel took land from the rightful owners??? Who are the "rightful owners"? Did they have titles or deeds? Or are your "rightful owners" a bunch of Muslim Palestinian land theives?

Hmmm! Still no reply. Golly gee, why is that?

That has been replied to quite a few times. The non-Jews owned over 85% of the land and the Jews less than 7% in 1946 before partition.

 

[montelatici]

And, answer the question what have I written that is not fact. I usually state the fact and then provide the source document.

Sometimes you do. Your claims that I have refuted:

European Jews invaded the land

What do you call going somewhere else, expelling the people living there by force and taking over the rule of the area?

The first aggression was the immigration

Again, what do you call immigration with the intent to expel the locals and take over? You don't call that aggression?

Israel is stolen land

Of course it is, as the land records show. What do you call taking the land of people that once owned it without paying for it.

Jews attacked Arabs first

Of course they did, by going to another continent to expel the people living there is the first attack. What else can you call it?


You refuted nothing.

What you just posted is a perfect example of what I mean when I accuse you of posting propaganda. Saying something like "Jews went to Palestine and took over" is false and extremely misleading; Anyway, lets refute your lies once more.
I
1) I've shown you the definition of invasion 1000 times, and European Jews immigrating to mandatory Palestine was absolutely not an invasion. That's not up for debate.

2) The first aggression was killing and assaulting Jews. The first few attacks were actually targeting the local Jews. To answer your question, no, that is aggression. Some Jews wanting to make mandatory Palestine a country for themselves (key word=WANTING) is a completely different topic . I've provided links for the attacks as well.

3) No, not at all. If it was stealing, then why did the U.N approve of it, recognize Israel and then make Israel a full U.N member. The land records have NOTHING to do with anything. It does not matter how much land was owned by Arabs vs. Jews. Israel declared independence in 1948 using Resolution 181 as a basis, the SAME WAY the Palestinians did so in 1988

4) Huh? Are you saying that Jews were the first ones to start killing Arabs ? Immigrating is not an attack, no matter what your intention is. stupid thing to day What an incredibly . Arabs were the first ones to attack, and they did so by massacring Jews several times before ANY Arab was killed or even attacked.

The problem with you is that you are to much of a coward to admit that you lost the argument. But anyone is free to see that I refuted every single one of your lies, and I'll be glad to provide links .

1. Going to a place on another continent with the intention of displacing the local people and creating a society/government of your own is an invasion. This was the first aggression. How in the devil can you logically dispute this fact?

2. The first recorded violence was as a result of conflict about land and access to it. It mushroomed from this to what we have now. Suffice it to say, if the European Jews had not gone to Palestine, this initial violence would not have started. Who is to blame for the this initial violence? The Europeans that had gone to Palestine or the locals who the Europeans were preventing from going about their business as they had for thousands of years?

You will have to download the source document via the link below and read pages 78-80 if you do not believe the transcription. Note: Source documents require more work to find and read. But, they are bereft of propaganda, they disclose fact.

http://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:f7a32077-ccb8-4a6a-b18e-ce7a60fbf518/datastreams/ATTACHMENT1

".....there wore also sides to the

newcomers which rankled with the fellaheen and, as these soon

led to friction, they should be considered at some length.

The Jewish settlers caused offence because they were

ignorant of Arabic and of Arab ways; inadvertently they

flouted local custom. For example, usage had it that everyone

shared natural pasturelands, which were regarded by the

fellaheen as a "gift from God" - "hadha min Allah". The Jews,

unfamiliar with this custom and fearing for their first small

crops, regarded the incursions of Arab shepherds with their

flocks as trespass and expelled them forcibly. When they

found that the Arabs repeatedly sent flocks and cattle to

graze on their land, the Jews organised guards (often local

Arabs) whose duty it was to round up the offending animals

and corral them. Their owners were made to pay fines to

2 redeem the animals or were punished bodily. The colonies

wore a temptation to the Arabs to steal and, again, the Jewish

settlers were forthright in restraining t hem. Accidents,

personal quarrels over matters of no great import, and

ignorance of other local customs also brought Arabs and Jows to blows from time to time. In their brushes with the

Arabs, the Jewish colonists were apt to use a heavy hand,

for they wore tough young men, unaccustomed to being able to

hit back with impunity and determined not to yield to anyone.

The first collision of any consequence in the history

of the New Yishshub took place at Petah Tiqva on March 29th,1886. It involved fellaheen from the large Muslim Arab

village of al Yahudiya about four miles south of Petah Tiqva.

This village did not have sufficient pasture of its own and

was accustomed to graze its animals on Petah Tiqva 1 s land, a practice which the Jews had tried to prevent. The fellaheen,

on their side, also provided a source of friction, for

they had ploughed up a road to the north of the colony,

claiming that it was not a public highway and demanding that

the settlors use other routes to roach their outlying tracts

of land. This caused inconvenience and the settlors felt

they could not comply. On March 28th, Joshua Stampfer rode

down the old road on his way to one of these tracts of land

and was relieved of his horse by the fellaheen. On the same

day, the Jews rounded up ten mules belonging to the fellaheen

which they found grazing on their land. On March 29th it

rained heavily and most of the colonists went to Jaffa to

settle personal affairs rather than work in the muddy fields.

Fifty to sixty villagers from al Yahudiya, seeing that the

colony was virtually empty, attacked it, smashing windows

and destroying household goods.

3. Just because a Western controlled organization decides to completely overturn the treaties and promises made by the predecessor organization (the League of Nations) and take land from the local people and give it Europeans does not make it a legal or moral act. For example, though at the time it was considered "legal" and "proper", today we consider the assignment of parts of Latin America to Spain and Portugal by the Pope, ridiculous.

4. Immigrating with the clear intention of creating a state of your own and preventing the local people from continuing their way of life is aggression and an invasion. The European settlement of Palestine is no different than the European settlement of North America. The Europeans invaded North America, the Thanksgiving myth notwithstanding.

1) then provide a link like I did to prove it was an invasion. I already disproved it with a link, all you posted was your bullshit opinion.

2) Massacring Jews was the first aggression. This is the third time you changed your story. First you said Jews killed Arabs first. When I refuted that you changed your story to Jews stole land before and Jews were killed. When I refuted that, you changed your story to the current one which is immigrating to the land was the first aggression. How can you possibly say something so stupid ?? You're nothing but a liar Monti, and you know it.

3)You didn't refute anything I said. You always use the U.N as a source, but now that the U.N refutes your lie, you call it a western controlled organization (which it never was)

4) Actually, the British promised the JEws that they could create a counry. Now, where is your link that says that what you claim, is really an invasion. I already provided links that prove an invasion is a military offensive.


What a waste of a post Monti. You did nothing but further prove that you are a liar, a MASSIVE MASSIVE MASSIVE propagandist and extremely stupid.

Immigrating to Mandatory Palestine was the first aggression? HAHAHAHA ! Poor moron can't handle the truth. Any time you want to post the same lies, I have no problem refuting your bullshit.

Oh, and as I offered before, we can take our debate to another section in USMB and several unbiased posters can determine who's right. But of course you're too much of a coward to do it because you know you're wrong.

Going to another continent to expel the local people and create your country is an invasion. No matter how you try to tap dance around the fact.

 

[toastman]

Sometimes you do. Your claims that I have refuted:

European Jews invaded the land

What do you call going somewhere else, expelling the people living there by force and taking over the rule of the area?

The first aggression was the immigration

Again, what do you call immigration with the intent to expel the locals and take over? You don't call that aggression?

Israel is stolen land

Of course it is, as the land records show. What do you call taking the land of people that once owned it without paying for it.

Jews attacked Arabs first

Of course they did, by going to another continent to expel the people living there is the first attack. What else can you call it?


You refuted nothing.

What you just posted is a perfect example of what I mean when I accuse you of posting propaganda. Saying something like "Jews went to Palestine and took over" is false and extremely misleading; Anyway, lets refute your lies once more.
I
1) I've shown you the definition of invasion 1000 times, and European Jews immigrating to mandatory Palestine was absolutely not an invasion. That's not up for debate.

2) The first aggression was killing and assaulting Jews. The first few attacks were actually targeting the local Jews. To answer your question, no, that is aggression. Some Jews wanting to make mandatory Palestine a country for themselves (key word=WANTING) is a completely different topic . I've provided links for the attacks as well.

3) No, not at all. If it was stealing, then why did the U.N approve of it, recognize Israel and then make Israel a full U.N member. The land records have NOTHING to do with anything. It does not matter how much land was owned by Arabs vs. Jews. Israel declared independence in 1948 using Resolution 181 as a basis, the SAME WAY the Palestinians did so in 1988

4) Huh? Are you saying that Jews were the first ones to start killing Arabs ? Immigrating is not an attack, no matter what your intention is. stupid thing to day What an incredibly . Arabs were the first ones to attack, and they did so by massacring Jews several times before ANY Arab was killed or even attacked.

The problem with you is that you are to much of a coward to admit that you lost the argument. But anyone is free to see that I refuted every single one of your lies, and I'll be glad to provide links .

1. Going to a place on another continent with the intention of displacing the local people and creating a society/government of your own is an invasion. This was the first aggression. How in the devil can you logically dispute this fact?

2. The first recorded violence was as a result of conflict about land and access to it. It mushroomed from this to what we have now. Suffice it to say, if the European Jews had not gone to Palestine, this initial violence would not have started. Who is to blame for the this initial violence? The Europeans that had gone to Palestine or the locals who the Europeans were preventing from going about their business as they had for thousands of years?

You will have to download the source document via the link below and read pages 78-80 if you do not believe the transcription. Note: Source documents require more work to find and read. But, they are bereft of propaganda, they disclose fact.

http://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:f7a32077-ccb8-4a6a-b18e-ce7a60fbf518/datastreams/ATTACHMENT1

".....there wore also sides to the

newcomers which rankled with the fellaheen and, as these soon

led to friction, they should be considered at some length.

The Jewish settlers caused offence because they were

ignorant of Arabic and of Arab ways; inadvertently they

flouted local custom. For example, usage had it that everyone

shared natural pasturelands, which were regarded by the

fellaheen as a "gift from God" - "hadha min Allah". The Jews,

unfamiliar with this custom and fearing for their first small

crops, regarded the incursions of Arab shepherds with their

flocks as trespass and expelled them forcibly. When they

found that the Arabs repeatedly sent flocks and cattle to

graze on their land, the Jews organised guards (often local

Arabs) whose duty it was to round up the offending animals

and corral them. Their owners were made to pay fines to

2 redeem the animals or were punished bodily. The colonies

wore a temptation to the Arabs to steal and, again, the Jewish

settlers were forthright in restraining t hem. Accidents,

personal quarrels over matters of no great import, and

ignorance of other local customs also brought Arabs and Jows to blows from time to time. In their brushes with the

Arabs, the Jewish colonists were apt to use a heavy hand,

for they wore tough young men, unaccustomed to being able to

hit back with impunity and determined not to yield to anyone.

The first collision of any consequence in the history

of the New Yishshub took place at Petah Tiqva on March 29th,1886. It involved fellaheen from the large Muslim Arab

village of al Yahudiya about four miles south of Petah Tiqva.

This village did not have sufficient pasture of its own and

was accustomed to graze its animals on Petah Tiqva 1 s land, a practice which the Jews had tried to prevent. The fellaheen,

on their side, also provided a source of friction, for

they had ploughed up a road to the north of the colony,

claiming that it was not a public highway and demanding that

the settlors use other routes to roach their outlying tracts

of land. This caused inconvenience and the settlors felt

they could not comply. On March 28th, Joshua Stampfer rode

down the old road on his way to one of these tracts of land

and was relieved of his horse by the fellaheen. On the same

day, the Jews rounded up ten mules belonging to the fellaheen

which they found grazing on their land. On March 29th it

rained heavily and most of the colonists went to Jaffa to

settle personal affairs rather than work in the muddy fields.

Fifty to sixty villagers from al Yahudiya, seeing that the

colony was virtually empty, attacked it, smashing windows

and destroying household goods.

3. Just because a Western controlled organization decides to completely overturn the treaties and promises made by the predecessor organization (the League of Nations) and take land from the local people and give it Europeans does not make it a legal or moral act. For example, though at the time it was considered "legal" and "proper", today we consider the assignment of parts of Latin America to Spain and Portugal by the Pope, ridiculous.

4. Immigrating with the clear intention of creating a state of your own and preventing the local people from continuing their way of life is aggression and an invasion. The European settlement of Palestine is no different than the European settlement of North America. The Europeans invaded North America, the Thanksgiving myth notwithstanding.

1) then provide a link like I did to prove it was an invasion. I already disproved it with a link, all you posted was your bullshit opinion.

2) Massacring Jews was the first aggression. This is the third time you changed your story. First you said Jews killed Arabs first. When I refuted that you changed your story to Jews stole land before and Jews were killed. When I refuted that, you changed your story to the current one which is immigrating to the land was the first aggression. How can you possibly say something so stupid ?? You're nothing but a liar Monti, and you know it.

3)You didn't refute anything I said. You always use the U.N as a source, but now that the U.N refutes your lie, you call it a western controlled organization (which it never was)

4) Actually, the British promised the JEws that they could create a counry. Now, where is your link that says that what you claim, is really an invasion. I already provided links that prove an invasion is a military offensive.


What a waste of a post Monti. You did nothing but further prove that you are a liar, a MASSIVE MASSIVE MASSIVE propagandist and extremely stupid.

Immigrating to Mandatory Palestine was the first aggression? HAHAHAHA ! Poor moron can't handle the truth. Any time you want to post the same lies, I have no problem refuting your bullshit.

Oh, and as I offered before, we can take our debate to another section in USMB and several unbiased posters can determine who's right. But of course you're too much of a coward to do it because you know you're wrong.

Going to another continent to expel the local people and create your country is an invasion. No matter how you try to tap dance around the fact.

Except that's not what happened. That's the Palestinian propaganda version of history, which you EXCEL at.

BTW, I provided several links to definitions to the word invasion and proved it was what the Jews did. Where's your links?

 

[toastman]

BTW Propaganda king, by posting what you're posting, you are proving to everyone that you are not capable of handling the truth because it simply hurts you too much.

But your feeble attempts at trying to disprove simple facts just show everyone that you are the KING OF PROPAGANDA.

 

[montelatici]

What you just posted is a perfect example of what I mean when I accuse you of posting propaganda. Saying something like "Jews went to Palestine and took over" is false and extremely misleading; Anyway, lets refute your lies once more.
I
1) I've shown you the definition of invasion 1000 times, and European Jews immigrating to mandatory Palestine was absolutely not an invasion. That's not up for debate.

2) The first aggression was killing and assaulting Jews. The first few attacks were actually targeting the local Jews. To answer your question, no, that is aggression. Some Jews wanting to make mandatory Palestine a country for themselves (key word=WANTING) is a completely different topic . I've provided links for the attacks as well.

3) No, not at all. If it was stealing, then why did the U.N approve of it, recognize Israel and then make Israel a full U.N member. The land records have NOTHING to do with anything. It does not matter how much land was owned by Arabs vs. Jews. Israel declared independence in 1948 using Resolution 181 as a basis, the SAME WAY the Palestinians did so in 1988

4) Huh? Are you saying that Jews were the first ones to start killing Arabs ? Immigrating is not an attack, no matter what your intention is. stupid thing to day What an incredibly . Arabs were the first ones to attack, and they did so by massacring Jews several times before ANY Arab was killed or even attacked.

The problem with you is that you are to much of a coward to admit that you lost the argument. But anyone is free to see that I refuted every single one of your lies, and I'll be glad to provide links .

1. Going to a place on another continent with the intention of displacing the local people and creating a society/government of your own is an invasion. This was the first aggression. How in the devil can you logically dispute this fact?

2. The first recorded violence was as a result of conflict about land and access to it. It mushroomed from this to what we have now. Suffice it to say, if the European Jews had not gone to Palestine, this initial violence would not have started. Who is to blame for the this initial violence? The Europeans that had gone to Palestine or the locals who the Europeans were preventing from going about their business as they had for thousands of years?

You will have to download the source document via the link below and read pages 78-80 if you do not believe the transcription. Note: Source documents require more work to find and read. But, they are bereft of propaganda, they disclose fact.

http://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:f7a32077-ccb8-4a6a-b18e-ce7a60fbf518/datastreams/ATTACHMENT1

".....there wore also sides to the

newcomers which rankled with the fellaheen and, as these soon

led to friction, they should be considered at some length.

The Jewish settlers caused offence because they were

ignorant of Arabic and of Arab ways; inadvertently they

flouted local custom. For example, usage had it that everyone

shared natural pasturelands, which were regarded by the

fellaheen as a "gift from God" - "hadha min Allah". The Jews,

unfamiliar with this custom and fearing for their first small

crops, regarded the incursions of Arab shepherds with their

flocks as trespass and expelled them forcibly. When they

found that the Arabs repeatedly sent flocks and cattle to

graze on their land, the Jews organised guards (often local

Arabs) whose duty it was to round up the offending animals

and corral them. Their owners were made to pay fines to

2 redeem the animals or were punished bodily. The colonies

wore a temptation to the Arabs to steal and, again, the Jewish

settlers were forthright in restraining t hem. Accidents,

personal quarrels over matters of no great import, and

ignorance of other local customs also brought Arabs and Jows to blows from time to time. In their brushes with the

Arabs, the Jewish colonists were apt to use a heavy hand,

for they wore tough young men, unaccustomed to being able to

hit back with impunity and determined not to yield to anyone.

The first collision of any consequence in the history

of the New Yishshub took place at Petah Tiqva on March 29th,1886. It involved fellaheen from the large Muslim Arab

village of al Yahudiya about four miles south of Petah Tiqva.

This village did not have sufficient pasture of its own and

was accustomed to graze its animals on Petah Tiqva 1 s land, a practice which the Jews had tried to prevent. The fellaheen,

on their side, also provided a source of friction, for

they had ploughed up a road to the north of the colony,

claiming that it was not a public highway and demanding that

the settlors use other routes to roach their outlying tracts

of land. This caused inconvenience and the settlors felt

they could not comply. On March 28th, Joshua Stampfer rode

down the old road on his way to one of these tracts of land

and was relieved of his horse by the fellaheen. On the same

day, the Jews rounded up ten mules belonging to the fellaheen

which they found grazing on their land. On March 29th it

rained heavily and most of the colonists went to Jaffa to

settle personal affairs rather than work in the muddy fields.

Fifty to sixty villagers from al Yahudiya, seeing that the

colony was virtually empty, attacked it, smashing windows

and destroying household goods.

3. Just because a Western controlled organization decides to completely overturn the treaties and promises made by the predecessor organization (the League of Nations) and take land from the local people and give it Europeans does not make it a legal or moral act. For example, though at the time it was considered "legal" and "proper", today we consider the assignment of parts of Latin America to Spain and Portugal by the Pope, ridiculous.

4. Immigrating with the clear intention of creating a state of your own and preventing the local people from continuing their way of life is aggression and an invasion. The European settlement of Palestine is no different than the European settlement of North America. The Europeans invaded North America, the Thanksgiving myth notwithstanding.

1) then provide a link like I did to prove it was an invasion. I already disproved it with a link, all you posted was your bullshit opinion.

2) Massacring Jews was the first aggression. This is the third time you changed your story. First you said Jews killed Arabs first. When I refuted that you changed your story to Jews stole land before and Jews were killed. When I refuted that, you changed your story to the current one which is immigrating to the land was the first aggression. How can you possibly say something so stupid ?? You're nothing but a liar Monti, and you know it.

3)You didn't refute anything I said. You always use the U.N as a source, but now that the U.N refutes your lie, you call it a western controlled organization (which it never was)

4) Actually, the British promised the JEws that they could create a counry. Now, where is your link that says that what you claim, is really an invasion. I already provided links that prove an invasion is a military offensive.


What a waste of a post Monti. You did nothing but further prove that you are a liar, a MASSIVE MASSIVE MASSIVE propagandist and extremely stupid.

Immigrating to Mandatory Palestine was the first aggression? HAHAHAHA ! Poor moron can't handle the truth. Any time you want to post the same lies, I have no problem refuting your bullshit.

Oh, and as I offered before, we can take our debate to another section in USMB and several unbiased posters can determine who's right. But of course you're too much of a coward to do it because you know you're wrong.

Going to another continent to expel the local people and create your country is an invasion. No matter how you try to tap dance around the fact.

Except that's not what happened. That's the Palestinian propaganda version of history, which you EXCEL at.

BTW, I provided several links to definitions to the word invasion and proved it was what the Jews did. Where's your links?

Mr. Propaganda,

How can you say "Except that's not what happened"? How can you deny the facts that stare you in the face. Why do you continue with this denial routine. You are similar to a Holocaust denier. Let's break it down:

1. People from Europe went to Palestine. yes/no
2. People from Europe settled in Palestine. yes/no
3. People from Europe went to Palestine settled in Palestine to create a country for themselves. yes/no
4. People from Europe expelled most of the local people that were living in the areas they settled in Palestine. yes/no
5. People from Europe created a country for themselves in Palestine. yes/no

 

[MJB12741]

What you just posted is a perfect example of what I mean when I accuse you of posting propaganda. Saying something like "Jews went to Palestine and took over" is false and extremely misleading; Anyway, lets refute your lies once more.
I
1) I've shown you the definition of invasion 1000 times, and European Jews immigrating to mandatory Palestine was absolutely not an invasion. That's not up for debate.

2) The first aggression was killing and assaulting Jews. The first few attacks were actually targeting the local Jews. To answer your question, no, that is aggression. Some Jews wanting to make mandatory Palestine a country for themselves (key word=WANTING) is a completely different topic . I've provided links for the attacks as well.

3) No, not at all. If it was stealing, then why did the U.N approve of it, recognize Israel and then make Israel a full U.N member. The land records have NOTHING to do with anything. It does not matter how much land was owned by Arabs vs. Jews. Israel declared independence in 1948 using Resolution 181 as a basis, the SAME WAY the Palestinians did so in 1988

4) Huh? Are you saying that Jews were the first ones to start killing Arabs ? Immigrating is not an attack, no matter what your intention is. stupid thing to day What an incredibly . Arabs were the first ones to attack, and they did so by massacring Jews several times before ANY Arab was killed or even attacked.

The problem with you is that you are to much of a coward to admit that you lost the argument. But anyone is free to see that I refuted every single one of your lies, and I'll be glad to provide links .

1. Going to a place on another continent with the intention of displacing the local people and creating a society/government of your own is an invasion. This was the first aggression. How in the devil can you logically dispute this fact?

2. The first recorded violence was as a result of conflict about land and access to it. It mushroomed from this to what we have now. Suffice it to say, if the European Jews had not gone to Palestine, this initial violence would not have started. Who is to blame for the this initial violence? The Europeans that had gone to Palestine or the locals who the Europeans were preventing from going about their business as they had for thousands of years?

You will have to download the source document via the link below and read pages 78-80 if you do not believe the transcription. Note: Source documents require more work to find and read. But, they are bereft of propaganda, they disclose fact.

http://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:f7a32077-ccb8-4a6a-b18e-ce7a60fbf518/datastreams/ATTACHMENT1

".....there wore also sides to the

newcomers which rankled with the fellaheen and, as these soon

led to friction, they should be considered at some length.

The Jewish settlers caused offence because they were

ignorant of Arabic and of Arab ways; inadvertently they

flouted local custom. For example, usage had it that everyone

shared natural pasturelands, which were regarded by the

fellaheen as a "gift from God" - "hadha min Allah". The Jews,

unfamiliar with this custom and fearing for their first small

crops, regarded the incursions of Arab shepherds with their

flocks as trespass and expelled them forcibly. When they

found that the Arabs repeatedly sent flocks and cattle to

graze on their land, the Jews organised guards (often local

Arabs) whose duty it was to round up the offending animals

and corral them. Their owners were made to pay fines to

2 redeem the animals or were punished bodily. The colonies

wore a temptation to the Arabs to steal and, again, the Jewish

settlers were forthright in restraining t hem. Accidents,

personal quarrels over matters of no great import, and

ignorance of other local customs also brought Arabs and Jows to blows from time to time. In their brushes with the

Arabs, the Jewish colonists were apt to use a heavy hand,

for they wore tough young men, unaccustomed to being able to

hit back with impunity and determined not to yield to anyone.

The first collision of any consequence in the history

of the New Yishshub took place at Petah Tiqva on March 29th,1886. It involved fellaheen from the large Muslim Arab

village of al Yahudiya about four miles south of Petah Tiqva.

This village did not have sufficient pasture of its own and

was accustomed to graze its animals on Petah Tiqva 1 s land, a practice which the Jews had tried to prevent. The fellaheen,

on their side, also provided a source of friction, for

they had ploughed up a road to the north of the colony,

claiming that it was not a public highway and demanding that

the settlors use other routes to roach their outlying tracts

of land. This caused inconvenience and the settlors felt

they could not comply. On March 28th, Joshua Stampfer rode

down the old road on his way to one of these tracts of land

and was relieved of his horse by the fellaheen. On the same

day, the Jews rounded up ten mules belonging to the fellaheen

which they found grazing on their land. On March 29th it

rained heavily and most of the colonists went to Jaffa to

settle personal affairs rather than work in the muddy fields.

Fifty to sixty villagers from al Yahudiya, seeing that the

colony was virtually empty, attacked it, smashing windows

and destroying household goods.

3. Just because a Western controlled organization decides to completely overturn the treaties and promises made by the predecessor organization (the League of Nations) and take land from the local people and give it Europeans does not make it a legal or moral act. For example, though at the time it was considered "legal" and "proper", today we consider the assignment of parts of Latin America to Spain and Portugal by the Pope, ridiculous.

4. Immigrating with the clear intention of creating a state of your own and preventing the local people from continuing their way of life is aggression and an invasion. The European settlement of Palestine is no different than the European settlement of North America. The Europeans invaded North America, the Thanksgiving myth notwithstanding.

1) then provide a link like I did to prove it was an invasion. I already disproved it with a link, all you posted was your bullshit opinion.

2) Massacring Jews was the first aggression. This is the third time you changed your story. First you said Jews killed Arabs first. When I refuted that you changed your story to Jews stole land before and Jews were killed. When I refuted that, you changed your story to the current one which is immigrating to the land was the first aggression. How can you possibly say something so stupid ?? You're nothing but a liar Monti, and you know it.

3)You didn't refute anything I said. You always use the U.N as a source, but now that the U.N refutes your lie, you call it a western controlled organization (which it never was)

4) Actually, the British promised the JEws that they could create a counry. Now, where is your link that says that what you claim, is really an invasion. I already provided links that prove an invasion is a military offensive.


What a waste of a post Monti. You did nothing but further prove that you are a liar, a MASSIVE MASSIVE MASSIVE propagandist and extremely stupid.

Immigrating to Mandatory Palestine was the first aggression? HAHAHAHA ! Poor moron can't handle the truth. Any time you want to post the same lies, I have no problem refuting your bullshit.

Oh, and as I offered before, we can take our debate to another section in USMB and several unbiased posters can determine who's right. But of course you're too much of a coward to do it because you know you're wrong.

Going to another continent to expel the local people and create your country is an invasion. No matter how you try to tap dance around the fact.

Except that's not what happened. That's the Palestinian propaganda version of history, which you EXCEL at.

BTW, I provided several links to definitions to the word invasion and proved it was what the Jews did. Where's your links?

Mr. Propaganda,

How can you say "Except that's not what happened"? How can you deny the facts that stare you in the face. Why do you continue with this denial routine. You are similar to a Holocaust denier. Let's break it down:

1. People from Europe went to Palestine. yes/no
2. People from Europe settled in Palestine. yes/no
3. People from Europe went to Palestine settled in Palestine to create a country for themselves. yes/no
4. People from Europe expelled most of the local people that were living in the areas they settled in Palestine. yes/no
5. People from Europe created a country for themselves in Palestine. yes/no

Let us not forget that modern day Israel was created both legally & ethically by a vote of the member nations of the UN. Golly gee, how were all of the Muslim countries created?

 

[Humanity]

BTW, I provided several links to definitions to the word invasion and proved it was what the Jews did.

Thanks for that Toasty!

 

[Phoenall]

The fact is, non-Jews owned more than 85% of the land in 1946 and the Jews owned less than 7%. Now the Jews probably own more than 90% of the land and the non-Jews less than 10% I would estimate. How did the land go from non-Jews to Jews? Was it paid for? Were the non-Jews compensated in another way?

If not, what is it called when land is taken from someone without paying for it?

View attachment 34837


Name one item of Palestinian propaganda I have linked. Just one.

Not your links, it's what you say about Israel.

What does anything you just posted have to do with anything? Israel declared independence legally after following the steps prepatory to independence laid out by the U.N. The West Bank is a different story.

So, they had the right to take land from the rightful owners? Have you ever heard of a UN action that sanctioned the taking of land from the owners without compensation?

What do you call taking land from the owners without compensation?

Now THAT'S funny! Israel took land from the rightful owners??? Who are the "rightful owners"? Did they have titles or deeds? Or are your "rightful owners" a bunch of Muslim Palestinian land theives?

Hmmm! Still no reply. Golly gee, why is that?

That has been replied to quite a few times. The non-Jews owned over 85% of the land and the Jews less than 7% in 1946 before partition.

View attachment 34903

Yes and the vast majority were Ottomans and not arab muslims. and this meant absolutely nothing once the mandate kicked in and the land was bequeathed to the parties that declared independence. So the arab muslims lost out because they acted like spoilt children again

 

[Phoenall]

Sometimes you do. Your claims that I have refuted:

European Jews invaded the land

What do you call going somewhere else, expelling the people living there by force and taking over the rule of the area?

The first aggression was the immigration

Again, what do you call immigration with the intent to expel the locals and take over? You don't call that aggression?

Israel is stolen land

Of course it is, as the land records show. What do you call taking the land of people that once owned it without paying for it.

Jews attacked Arabs first

Of course they did, by going to another continent to expel the people living there is the first attack. What else can you call it?


You refuted nothing.

What you just posted is a perfect example of what I mean when I accuse you of posting propaganda. Saying something like "Jews went to Palestine and took over" is false and extremely misleading; Anyway, lets refute your lies once more.
I
1) I've shown you the definition of invasion 1000 times, and European Jews immigrating to mandatory Palestine was absolutely not an invasion. That's not up for debate.

2) The first aggression was killing and assaulting Jews. The first few attacks were actually targeting the local Jews. To answer your question, no, that is aggression. Some Jews wanting to make mandatory Palestine a country for themselves (key word=WANTING) is a completely different topic . I've provided links for the attacks as well.

3) No, not at all. If it was stealing, then why did the U.N approve of it, recognize Israel and then make Israel a full U.N member. The land records have NOTHING to do with anything. It does not matter how much land was owned by Arabs vs. Jews. Israel declared independence in 1948 using Resolution 181 as a basis, the SAME WAY the Palestinians did so in 1988

4) Huh? Are you saying that Jews were the first ones to start killing Arabs ? Immigrating is not an attack, no matter what your intention is. stupid thing to day What an incredibly . Arabs were the first ones to attack, and they did so by massacring Jews several times before ANY Arab was killed or even attacked.

The problem with you is that you are to much of a coward to admit that you lost the argument. But anyone is free to see that I refuted every single one of your lies, and I'll be glad to provide links .

1. Going to a place on another continent with the intention of displacing the local people and creating a society/government of your own is an invasion. This was the first aggression. How in the devil can you logically dispute this fact?

2. The first recorded violence was as a result of conflict about land and access to it. It mushroomed from this to what we have now. Suffice it to say, if the European Jews had not gone to Palestine, this initial violence would not have started. Who is to blame for the this initial violence? The Europeans that had gone to Palestine or the locals who the Europeans were preventing from going about their business as they had for thousands of years?

You will have to download the source document via the link below and read pages 78-80 if you do not believe the transcription. Note: Source documents require more work to find and read. But, they are bereft of propaganda, they disclose fact.

http://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:f7a32077-ccb8-4a6a-b18e-ce7a60fbf518/datastreams/ATTACHMENT1

".....there wore also sides to the

newcomers which rankled with the fellaheen and, as these soon

led to friction, they should be considered at some length.

The Jewish settlers caused offence because they were

ignorant of Arabic and of Arab ways; inadvertently they

flouted local custom. For example, usage had it that everyone

shared natural pasturelands, which were regarded by the

fellaheen as a "gift from God" - "hadha min Allah". The Jews,

unfamiliar with this custom and fearing for their first small

crops, regarded the incursions of Arab shepherds with their

flocks as trespass and expelled them forcibly. When they

found that the Arabs repeatedly sent flocks and cattle to

graze on their land, the Jews organised guards (often local

Arabs) whose duty it was to round up the offending animals

and corral them. Their owners were made to pay fines to

2 redeem the animals or were punished bodily. The colonies

wore a temptation to the Arabs to steal and, again, the Jewish

settlers were forthright in restraining t hem. Accidents,

personal quarrels over matters of no great import, and

ignorance of other local customs also brought Arabs and Jows to blows from time to time. In their brushes with the

Arabs, the Jewish colonists were apt to use a heavy hand,

for they wore tough young men, unaccustomed to being able to

hit back with impunity and determined not to yield to anyone.

The first collision of any consequence in the history

of the New Yishshub took place at Petah Tiqva on March 29th,1886. It involved fellaheen from the large Muslim Arab

village of al Yahudiya about four miles south of Petah Tiqva.

This village did not have sufficient pasture of its own and

was accustomed to graze its animals on Petah Tiqva 1 s land, a practice which the Jews had tried to prevent. The fellaheen,

on their side, also provided a source of friction, for

they had ploughed up a road to the north of the colony,

claiming that it was not a public highway and demanding that

the settlors use other routes to roach their outlying tracts

of land. This caused inconvenience and the settlors felt

they could not comply. On March 28th, Joshua Stampfer rode

down the old road on his way to one of these tracts of land

and was relieved of his horse by the fellaheen. On the same

day, the Jews rounded up ten mules belonging to the fellaheen

which they found grazing on their land. On March 29th it

rained heavily and most of the colonists went to Jaffa to

settle personal affairs rather than work in the muddy fields.

Fifty to sixty villagers from al Yahudiya, seeing that the

colony was virtually empty, attacked it, smashing windows

and destroying household goods.

3. Just because a Western controlled organization decides to completely overturn the treaties and promises made by the predecessor organization (the League of Nations) and take land from the local people and give it Europeans does not make it a legal or moral act. For example, though at the time it was considered "legal" and "proper", today we consider the assignment of parts of Latin America to Spain and Portugal by the Pope, ridiculous.

4. Immigrating with the clear intention of creating a state of your own and preventing the local people from continuing their way of life is aggression and an invasion. The European settlement of Palestine is no different than the European settlement of North America. The Europeans invaded North America, the Thanksgiving myth notwithstanding.

1) then provide a link like I did to prove it was an invasion. I already disproved it with a link, all you posted was your bullshit opinion.

2) Massacring Jews was the first aggression. This is the third time you changed your story. First you said Jews killed Arabs first. When I refuted that you changed your story to Jews stole land before and Jews were killed. When I refuted that, you changed your story to the current one which is immigrating to the land was the first aggression. How can you possibly say something so stupid ?? You're nothing but a liar Monti, and you know it.

3)You didn't refute anything I said. You always use the U.N as a source, but now that the U.N refutes your lie, you call it a western controlled organization (which it never was)

4) Actually, the British promised the JEws that they could create a counry. Now, where is your link that says that what you claim, is really an invasion. I already provided links that prove an invasion is a military offensive.


What a waste of a post Monti. You did nothing but further prove that you are a liar, a MASSIVE MASSIVE MASSIVE propagandist and extremely stupid.

Immigrating to Mandatory Palestine was the first aggression? HAHAHAHA ! Poor moron can't handle the truth. Any time you want to post the same lies, I have no problem refuting your bullshit.

Oh, and as I offered before, we can take our debate to another section in USMB and several unbiased posters can determine who's right. But of course you're too much of a coward to do it because you know you're wrong.

Going to another continent to expel the local people and create your country is an invasion. No matter how you try to tap dance around the fact.

 

[Phoenall]

Sometimes you do. Your claims that I have refuted:

European Jews invaded the land

What do you call going somewhere else, expelling the people living there by force and taking over the rule of the area?

The first aggression was the immigration

Again, what do you call immigration with the intent to expel the locals and take over? You don't call that aggression?

Israel is stolen land

Of course it is, as the land records show. What do you call taking the land of people that once owned it without paying for it.

Jews attacked Arabs first

Of course they did, by going to another continent to expel the people living there is the first attack. What else can you call it?


You refuted nothing.

What you just posted is a perfect example of what I mean when I accuse you of posting propaganda. Saying something like "Jews went to Palestine and took over" is false and extremely misleading; Anyway, lets refute your lies once more.
I
1) I've shown you the definition of invasion 1000 times, and European Jews immigrating to mandatory Palestine was absolutely not an invasion. That's not up for debate.

2) The first aggression was killing and assaulting Jews. The first few attacks were actually targeting the local Jews. To answer your question, no, that is aggression. Some Jews wanting to make mandatory Palestine a country for themselves (key word=WANTING) is a completely different topic . I've provided links for the attacks as well.

3) No, not at all. If it was stealing, then why did the U.N approve of it, recognize Israel and then make Israel a full U.N member. The land records have NOTHING to do with anything. It does not matter how much land was owned by Arabs vs. Jews. Israel declared independence in 1948 using Resolution 181 as a basis, the SAME WAY the Palestinians did so in 1988

4) Huh? Are you saying that Jews were the first ones to start killing Arabs ? Immigrating is not an attack, no matter what your intention is. stupid thing to day What an incredibly . Arabs were the first ones to attack, and they did so by massacring Jews several times before ANY Arab was killed or even attacked.

The problem with you is that you are to much of a coward to admit that you lost the argument. But anyone is free to see that I refuted every single one of your lies, and I'll be glad to provide links .

1. Going to a place on another continent with the intention of displacing the local people and creating a society/government of your own is an invasion. This was the first aggression. How in the devil can you logically dispute this fact?

2. The first recorded violence was as a result of conflict about land and access to it. It mushroomed from this to what we have now. Suffice it to say, if the European Jews had not gone to Palestine, this initial violence would not have started. Who is to blame for the this initial violence? The Europeans that had gone to Palestine or the locals who the Europeans were preventing from going about their business as they had for thousands of years?

You will have to download the source document via the link below and read pages 78-80 if you do not believe the transcription. Note: Source documents require more work to find and read. But, they are bereft of propaganda, they disclose fact.

http://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:f7a32077-ccb8-4a6a-b18e-ce7a60fbf518/datastreams/ATTACHMENT1

".....there wore also sides to the

newcomers which rankled with the fellaheen and, as these soon

led to friction, they should be considered at some length.

The Jewish settlers caused offence because they were

ignorant of Arabic and of Arab ways; inadvertently they

flouted local custom. For example, usage had it that everyone

shared natural pasturelands, which were regarded by the

fellaheen as a "gift from God" - "hadha min Allah". The Jews,

unfamiliar with this custom and fearing for their first small

crops, regarded the incursions of Arab shepherds with their

flocks as trespass and expelled them forcibly. When they

found that the Arabs repeatedly sent flocks and cattle to

graze on their land, the Jews organised guards (often local

Arabs) whose duty it was to round up the offending animals

and corral them. Their owners were made to pay fines to

2 redeem the animals or were punished bodily. The colonies

wore a temptation to the Arabs to steal and, again, the Jewish

settlers were forthright in restraining t hem. Accidents,

personal quarrels over matters of no great import, and

ignorance of other local customs also brought Arabs and Jows to blows from time to time. In their brushes with the

Arabs, the Jewish colonists were apt to use a heavy hand,

for they wore tough young men, unaccustomed to being able to

hit back with impunity and determined not to yield to anyone.

The first collision of any consequence in the history

of the New Yishshub took place at Petah Tiqva on March 29th,1886. It involved fellaheen from the large Muslim Arab

village of al Yahudiya about four miles south of Petah Tiqva.

This village did not have sufficient pasture of its own and

was accustomed to graze its animals on Petah Tiqva 1 s land, a practice which the Jews had tried to prevent. The fellaheen,

on their side, also provided a source of friction, for

they had ploughed up a road to the north of the colony,

claiming that it was not a public highway and demanding that

the settlors use other routes to roach their outlying tracts

of land. This caused inconvenience and the settlors felt

they could not comply. On March 28th, Joshua Stampfer rode

down the old road on his way to one of these tracts of land

and was relieved of his horse by the fellaheen. On the same

day, the Jews rounded up ten mules belonging to the fellaheen

which they found grazing on their land. On March 29th it

rained heavily and most of the colonists went to Jaffa to

settle personal affairs rather than work in the muddy fields.

Fifty to sixty villagers from al Yahudiya, seeing that the

colony was virtually empty, attacked it, smashing windows

and destroying household goods.

3. Just because a Western controlled organization decides to completely overturn the treaties and promises made by the predecessor organization (the League of Nations) and take land from the local people and give it Europeans does not make it a legal or moral act. For example, though at the time it was considered "legal" and "proper", today we consider the assignment of parts of Latin America to Spain and Portugal by the Pope, ridiculous.

4. Immigrating with the clear intention of creating a state of your own and preventing the local people from continuing their way of life is aggression and an invasion. The European settlement of Palestine is no different than the European settlement of North America. The Europeans invaded North America, the Thanksgiving myth notwithstanding.

1) then provide a link like I did to prove it was an invasion. I already disproved it with a link, all you posted was your bullshit opinion.

2) Massacring Jews was the first aggression. This is the third time you changed your story. First you said Jews killed Arabs first. When I refuted that you changed your story to Jews stole land before and Jews were killed. When I refuted that, you changed your story to the current one which is immigrating to the land was the first aggression. How can you possibly say something so stupid ?? You're nothing but a liar Monti, and you know it.

3)You didn't refute anything I said. You always use the U.N as a source, but now that the U.N refutes your lie, you call it a western controlled organization (which it never was)

4) Actually, the British promised the JEws that they could create a counry. Now, where is your link that says that what you claim, is really an invasion. I already provided links that prove an invasion is a military offensive.


What a waste of a post Monti. You did nothing but further prove that you are a liar, a MASSIVE MASSIVE MASSIVE propagandist and extremely stupid.

Immigrating to Mandatory Palestine was the first aggression? HAHAHAHA ! Poor moron can't handle the truth. Any time you want to post the same lies, I have no problem refuting your bullshit.

Oh, and as I offered before, we can take our debate to another section in USMB and several unbiased posters can determine who's right. But of course you're too much of a coward to do it because you know you're wrong.

Going to another continent to expel the local people and create your country is an invasion. No matter how you try to tap dance around the fact.

So why do you and your fellow muslims do it all the time ?

By the way the Jews were invited to move to Palestine and settle anywhere they wanted under CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW. The arab muslims were not.

So do explain how it was an invasion

 

[Phoenall]

What you just posted is a perfect example of what I mean when I accuse you of posting propaganda. Saying something like "Jews went to Palestine and took over" is false and extremely misleading; Anyway, lets refute your lies once more.
I
1) I've shown you the definition of invasion 1000 times, and European Jews immigrating to mandatory Palestine was absolutely not an invasion. That's not up for debate.

2) The first aggression was killing and assaulting Jews. The first few attacks were actually targeting the local Jews. To answer your question, no, that is aggression. Some Jews wanting to make mandatory Palestine a country for themselves (key word=WANTING) is a completely different topic . I've provided links for the attacks as well.

3) No, not at all. If it was stealing, then why did the U.N approve of it, recognize Israel and then make Israel a full U.N member. The land records have NOTHING to do with anything. It does not matter how much land was owned by Arabs vs. Jews. Israel declared independence in 1948 using Resolution 181 as a basis, the SAME WAY the Palestinians did so in 1988

4) Huh? Are you saying that Jews were the first ones to start killing Arabs ? Immigrating is not an attack, no matter what your intention is. stupid thing to day What an incredibly . Arabs were the first ones to attack, and they did so by massacring Jews several times before ANY Arab was killed or even attacked.

The problem with you is that you are to much of a coward to admit that you lost the argument. But anyone is free to see that I refuted every single one of your lies, and I'll be glad to provide links .

1. Going to a place on another continent with the intention of displacing the local people and creating a society/government of your own is an invasion. This was the first aggression. How in the devil can you logically dispute this fact?

2. The first recorded violence was as a result of conflict about land and access to it. It mushroomed from this to what we have now. Suffice it to say, if the European Jews had not gone to Palestine, this initial violence would not have started. Who is to blame for the this initial violence? The Europeans that had gone to Palestine or the locals who the Europeans were preventing from going about their business as they had for thousands of years?

You will have to download the source document via the link below and read pages 78-80 if you do not believe the transcription. Note: Source documents require more work to find and read. But, they are bereft of propaganda, they disclose fact.

http://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:f7a32077-ccb8-4a6a-b18e-ce7a60fbf518/datastreams/ATTACHMENT1

".....there wore also sides to the

newcomers which rankled with the fellaheen and, as these soon

led to friction, they should be considered at some length.

The Jewish settlers caused offence because they were

ignorant of Arabic and of Arab ways; inadvertently they

flouted local custom. For example, usage had it that everyone

shared natural pasturelands, which were regarded by the

fellaheen as a "gift from God" - "hadha min Allah". The Jews,

unfamiliar with this custom and fearing for their first small

crops, regarded the incursions of Arab shepherds with their

flocks as trespass and expelled them forcibly. When they

found that the Arabs repeatedly sent flocks and cattle to

graze on their land, the Jews organised guards (often local

Arabs) whose duty it was to round up the offending animals

and corral them. Their owners were made to pay fines to

2 redeem the animals or were punished bodily. The colonies

wore a temptation to the Arabs to steal and, again, the Jewish

settlers were forthright in restraining t hem. Accidents,

personal quarrels over matters of no great import, and

ignorance of other local customs also brought Arabs and Jows to blows from time to time. In their brushes with the

Arabs, the Jewish colonists were apt to use a heavy hand,

for they wore tough young men, unaccustomed to being able to

hit back with impunity and determined not to yield to anyone.

The first collision of any consequence in the history

of the New Yishshub took place at Petah Tiqva on March 29th,1886. It involved fellaheen from the large Muslim Arab

village of al Yahudiya about four miles south of Petah Tiqva.

This village did not have sufficient pasture of its own and

was accustomed to graze its animals on Petah Tiqva 1 s land, a practice which the Jews had tried to prevent. The fellaheen,

on their side, also provided a source of friction, for

they had ploughed up a road to the north of the colony,

claiming that it was not a public highway and demanding that

the settlors use other routes to roach their outlying tracts

of land. This caused inconvenience and the settlors felt

they could not comply. On March 28th, Joshua Stampfer rode

down the old road on his way to one of these tracts of land

and was relieved of his horse by the fellaheen. On the same

day, the Jews rounded up ten mules belonging to the fellaheen

which they found grazing on their land. On March 29th it

rained heavily and most of the colonists went to Jaffa to

settle personal affairs rather than work in the muddy fields.

Fifty to sixty villagers from al Yahudiya, seeing that the

colony was virtually empty, attacked it, smashing windows

and destroying household goods.

3. Just because a Western controlled organization decides to completely overturn the treaties and promises made by the predecessor organization (the League of Nations) and take land from the local people and give it Europeans does not make it a legal or moral act. For example, though at the time it was considered "legal" and "proper", today we consider the assignment of parts of Latin America to Spain and Portugal by the Pope, ridiculous.

4. Immigrating with the clear intention of creating a state of your own and preventing the local people from continuing their way of life is aggression and an invasion. The European settlement of Palestine is no different than the European settlement of North America. The Europeans invaded North America, the Thanksgiving myth notwithstanding.

1) then provide a link like I did to prove it was an invasion. I already disproved it with a link, all you posted was your bullshit opinion.

2) Massacring Jews was the first aggression. This is the third time you changed your story. First you said Jews killed Arabs first. When I refuted that you changed your story to Jews stole land before and Jews were killed. When I refuted that, you changed your story to the current one which is immigrating to the land was the first aggression. How can you possibly say something so stupid ?? You're nothing but a liar Monti, and you know it.

3)You didn't refute anything I said. You always use the U.N as a source, but now that the U.N refutes your lie, you call it a western controlled organization (which it never was)

4) Actually, the British promised the JEws that they could create a counry. Now, where is your link that says that what you claim, is really an invasion. I already provided links that prove an invasion is a military offensive.


What a waste of a post Monti. You did nothing but further prove that you are a liar, a MASSIVE MASSIVE MASSIVE propagandist and extremely stupid.

Immigrating to Mandatory Palestine was the first aggression? HAHAHAHA ! Poor moron can't handle the truth. Any time you want to post the same lies, I have no problem refuting your bullshit.

Oh, and as I offered before, we can take our debate to another section in USMB and several unbiased posters can determine who's right. But of course you're too much of a coward to do it because you know you're wrong.

Going to another continent to expel the local people and create your country is an invasion. No matter how you try to tap dance around the fact.

Except that's not what happened. That's the Palestinian propaganda version of history, which you EXCEL at.

BTW, I provided several links to definitions to the word invasion and proved it was what the Jews did. Where's your links?

Mr. Propaganda,

How can you say "Except that's not what happened"? How can you deny the facts that stare you in the face. Why do you continue with this denial routine. You are similar to a Holocaust denier. Let's break it down:

1. People from Europe went to Palestine. yes/no
2. People from Europe settled in Palestine. yes/no
3. People from Europe went to Palestine settled in Palestine to create a country for themselves. yes/no
4. People from Europe expelled most of the local people that were living in the areas they settled in Palestine. yes/no
5. People from Europe created a country for themselves in Palestine. yes/no

NO they were invited
YES as they were invited to do
YES as they were invited to do
NO they expelled themselves by attacking the Jews
YES as they were invited to do


So were is the invasio

 

[montelatici]

1. Going to a place on another continent with the intention of displacing the local people and creating a society/government of your own is an invasion. This was the first aggression. How in the devil can you logically dispute this fact?

2. The first recorded violence was as a result of conflict about land and access to it. It mushroomed from this to what we have now. Suffice it to say, if the European Jews had not gone to Palestine, this initial violence would not have started. Who is to blame for the this initial violence? The Europeans that had gone to Palestine or the locals who the Europeans were preventing from going about their business as they had for thousands of years?

You will have to download the source document via the link below and read pages 78-80 if you do not believe the transcription. Note: Source documents require more work to find and read. But, they are bereft of propaganda, they disclose fact.

http://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:f7a32077-ccb8-4a6a-b18e-ce7a60fbf518/datastreams/ATTACHMENT1

".....there wore also sides to the

newcomers which rankled with the fellaheen and, as these soon

led to friction, they should be considered at some length.

The Jewish settlers caused offence because they were

ignorant of Arabic and of Arab ways; inadvertently they

flouted local custom. For example, usage had it that everyone

shared natural pasturelands, which were regarded by the

fellaheen as a "gift from God" - "hadha min Allah". The Jews,

unfamiliar with this custom and fearing for their first small

crops, regarded the incursions of Arab shepherds with their

flocks as trespass and expelled them forcibly. When they

found that the Arabs repeatedly sent flocks and cattle to

graze on their land, the Jews organised guards (often local

Arabs) whose duty it was to round up the offending animals

and corral them. Their owners were made to pay fines to

2 redeem the animals or were punished bodily. The colonies

wore a temptation to the Arabs to steal and, again, the Jewish

settlers were forthright in restraining t hem. Accidents,

personal quarrels over matters of no great import, and

ignorance of other local customs also brought Arabs and Jows to blows from time to time. In their brushes with the

Arabs, the Jewish colonists were apt to use a heavy hand,

for they wore tough young men, unaccustomed to being able to

hit back with impunity and determined not to yield to anyone.

The first collision of any consequence in the history

of the New Yishshub took place at Petah Tiqva on March 29th,1886. It involved fellaheen from the large Muslim Arab

village of al Yahudiya about four miles south of Petah Tiqva.

This village did not have sufficient pasture of its own and

was accustomed to graze its animals on Petah Tiqva 1 s land, a practice which the Jews had tried to prevent. The fellaheen,

on their side, also provided a source of friction, for

they had ploughed up a road to the north of the colony,

claiming that it was not a public highway and demanding that

the settlors use other routes to roach their outlying tracts

of land. This caused inconvenience and the settlors felt

they could not comply. On March 28th, Joshua Stampfer rode

down the old road on his way to one of these tracts of land

and was relieved of his horse by the fellaheen. On the same

day, the Jews rounded up ten mules belonging to the fellaheen

which they found grazing on their land. On March 29th it

rained heavily and most of the colonists went to Jaffa to

settle personal affairs rather than work in the muddy fields.

Fifty to sixty villagers from al Yahudiya, seeing that the

colony was virtually empty, attacked it, smashing windows

and destroying household goods.

3. Just because a Western controlled organization decides to completely overturn the treaties and promises made by the predecessor organization (the League of Nations) and take land from the local people and give it Europeans does not make it a legal or moral act. For example, though at the time it was considered "legal" and "proper", today we consider the assignment of parts of Latin America to Spain and Portugal by the Pope, ridiculous.

4. Immigrating with the clear intention of creating a state of your own and preventing the local people from continuing their way of life is aggression and an invasion. The European settlement of Palestine is no different than the European settlement of North America. The Europeans invaded North America, the Thanksgiving myth notwithstanding.

1) then provide a link like I did to prove it was an invasion. I already disproved it with a link, all you posted was your bullshit opinion.

2) Massacring Jews was the first aggression. This is the third time you changed your story. First you said Jews killed Arabs first. When I refuted that you changed your story to Jews stole land before and Jews were killed. When I refuted that, you changed your story to the current one which is immigrating to the land was the first aggression. How can you possibly say something so stupid ?? You're nothing but a liar Monti, and you know it.

3)You didn't refute anything I said. You always use the U.N as a source, but now that the U.N refutes your lie, you call it a western controlled organization (which it never was)

4) Actually, the British promised the JEws that they could create a counry. Now, where is your link that says that what you claim, is really an invasion. I already provided links that prove an invasion is a military offensive.


What a waste of a post Monti. You did nothing but further prove that you are a liar, a MASSIVE MASSIVE MASSIVE propagandist and extremely stupid.

Immigrating to Mandatory Palestine was the first aggression? HAHAHAHA ! Poor moron can't handle the truth. Any time you want to post the same lies, I have no problem refuting your bullshit.

Oh, and as I offered before, we can take our debate to another section in USMB and several unbiased posters can determine who's right. But of course you're too much of a coward to do it because you know you're wrong.

Going to another continent to expel the local people and create your country is an invasion. No matter how you try to tap dance around the fact.

Except that's not what happened. That's the Palestinian propaganda version of history, which you EXCEL at.

BTW, I provided several links to definitions to the word invasion and proved it was what the Jews did. Where's your links?

Mr. Propaganda,

How can you say "Except that's not what happened"? How can you deny the facts that stare you in the face. Why do you continue with this denial routine. You are similar to a Holocaust denier. Let's break it down:

1. People from Europe went to Palestine. yes/no
2. People from Europe settled in Palestine. yes/no
3. People from Europe went to Palestine settled in Palestine to create a country for themselves. yes/no
4. People from Europe expelled most of the local people that were living in the areas they settled in Palestine. yes/no
5. People from Europe created a country for themselves in Palestine. yes/no

NO they were invited
YES as they were invited to do
YES as they were invited to do
NO they expelled themselves by attacking the Jews
YES as they were invited to do


So were is the invasio

The invasion is self-evident.

 

[montelatici]

invasion-"an unwelcome intrusion into another's domain."

 

[MJB12741]

invasion-"an unwelcome intrusion into another's domain."

Are you referrring to the Palestinian land theft of Israel?

 

[montelatici]

invasion-"an unwelcome intrusion into another's domain."

Are you referrring to the Palestinian land theft of Israel?

The Jews came from Europe and took the land from the local inhabitants, the Palestinians lived in Palestine and owned more than 85% of the land as late as 1946. They could not have stolen something they already owned.

 

[MJB12741]

invasion-"an unwelcome intrusion into another's domain."

Are you referrring to the Palestinian land theft of Israel?

The Jews came from Europe and took the land from the local inhabitants, the Palestinians lived in Palestine and owned more than 85% of the land as late as 1946. They could not have stolen something they already owned.

OMG! You mean the Palestinians had titles or deeds to the land they occupied? I didn't know that. Hey, how about we settle the land dispute where all Palestinians with titles or deeds can stay & all the land theive Palestinians must go. Fair enough?

 

[montelatici]

"You mean the Palestinians had titles or deeds to the land they occupied?"

Of course, and ownership was recorded in the land registry for Palestine without which taxes could not be calculated, so the records were kept accurate. That's how the Survey was able to determine who owned the land. Using these records, archived by the UN, the Jews would have to leave as they would own almost nothing, i.e. less than 7%.

 

[docmauser1]

invasion-"an unwelcome intrusion into another's domain."

Are you referrring to the Palestinian land theft of Israel?

The Jews came from Europe and took the land from the local inhabitants, the Palestinians lived in Palestine and owned more than 85% of the land as late as 1946. They could not have stolen something they already owned.

More of the 1001 palisimian tall tales about how those major arab settlers and squatters and squatters from the hood all got to be saudi sheiks to own 5%, 6%, 7%, ..., 85%(!) of the mandate palestine. Yeah, right!

 

[Phoenall]

1) then provide a link like I did to prove it was an invasion. I already disproved it with a link, all you posted was your bullshit opinion.

2) Massacring Jews was the first aggression. This is the third time you changed your story. First you said Jews killed Arabs first. When I refuted that you changed your story to Jews stole land before and Jews were killed. When I refuted that, you changed your story to the current one which is immigrating to the land was the first aggression. How can you possibly say something so stupid ?? You're nothing but a liar Monti, and you know it.

3)You didn't refute anything I said. You always use the U.N as a source, but now that the U.N refutes your lie, you call it a western controlled organization (which it never was)

4) Actually, the British promised the JEws that they could create a counry. Now, where is your link that says that what you claim, is really an invasion. I already provided links that prove an invasion is a military offensive.


What a waste of a post Monti. You did nothing but further prove that you are a liar, a MASSIVE MASSIVE MASSIVE propagandist and extremely stupid.

Immigrating to Mandatory Palestine was the first aggression? HAHAHAHA ! Poor moron can't handle the truth. Any time you want to post the same lies, I have no problem refuting your bullshit.

Oh, and as I offered before, we can take our debate to another section in USMB and several unbiased posters can determine who's right. But of course you're too much of a coward to do it because you know you're wrong.

Going to another continent to expel the local people and create your country is an invasion. No matter how you try to tap dance around the fact.

Except that's not what happened. That's the Palestinian propaganda version of history, which you EXCEL at.

BTW, I provided several links to definitions to the word invasion and proved it was what the Jews did. Where's your links?

Mr. Propaganda,

How can you say "Except that's not what happened"? How can you deny the facts that stare you in the face. Why do you continue with this denial routine. You are similar to a Holocaust denier. Let's break it down:

1. People from Europe went to Palestine. yes/no
2. People from Europe settled in Palestine. yes/no
3. People from Europe went to Palestine settled in Palestine to create a country for themselves. yes/no
4. People from Europe expelled most of the local people that were living in the areas they settled in Palestine. yes/no
5. People from Europe created a country for themselves in Palestine. yes/no

NO they were invited
YES as they were invited to do
YES as they were invited to do
NO they expelled themselves by attacking the Jews
YES as they were invited to do


So were is the invasio

The invasion is self-evident.

You mean the invasion of the arab muslims into Jewish lands ?

 

[Phoenall]

invasion-"an unwelcome intrusion into another's domain."

Yep that the arab muslims alright, unwelcome everywhere in the world