Separating anti-Semitism from Anti-Zionism

[RoccoR]

flacaltenn, et al,

I'm not sure that in 2016, there is still a credible and universally understood definition of Zionist, that everyone understands the same way.

The Zionist ship has really sailed decades ago.. And as far as Jews being split over the rationale for a "homeland" -- that is truly a non-issue today within the religion.

Zionism was an international "nationalist movement" that pretty much accomplished their goal 50 years ago. There are virtually no Jews today that want Israel to be packed into crates and moved elsewhere.

The folks that NEED a nationalist movement TODAY are the Palis. And for some damn reason -- they don't recognize how many times they've ruined that road to self-determination..

Ask me if I'm a Zionist and I'd have to think REAL HARD as to how that would be interpreted by folks who MISUSE the term constantly.. The Jews living in Israel ain't Zionists silly wabbits -- they are ISRAELIS..

(COMMENT)

I think that the Movement of the 1890's --- Zionism has run its course with the establishment of Jewish Sovereignty.

Realistically, Zionism has progressively moved from a "Nationalist Movement Promoting the Return of the Jewish People" --- to --- a "Retention and Protectionist Movement" of the Jewish Culture in Israel.

Just as Europeans will tolerate Jew as long as they recognize some benefit financially in their presence; in times of political unrest and economic disturbances Jews themselves vulnerable to persecution and the threat of expulsion. In the (roughly) 200 years prior to the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel, there were more than 15 separate incidents where people of the Jewish Culture were targeted.

• 1745 Moravia
• 1753 Lithuania
• 1761 Bordeaux
• 1772 Deported to the Western region of Imperial Russia
• 1775 Warsaw
• 1789 Alsace
• 1804-08 Russia
• 1815 Lbeck & Bremen
• 1815 Franconia, Swabia & Bavaria
• 1820 Bremen
• 1843 Russian Border Austria & Prussia
• 1866 Galatz, Romania
• 1880s Russia
• 1891 Moscow
• 1919 Bavaria (foreign born Jews)
• 1938-45 Nazi Controlled Areas
  • 107,000 departed from the Netherlands
  • 28,500 from Belgium
  • 73,000 from France
  • 770 Norway
  • 50,000 Slovakian Jews were deported
  • 430,000 Hungarian Jews were sent to Auschwitz

Now that the Jewish people have established and built-up a homeland (Israel) that they can protect from the European and Arab League persecution, the European (thru the UN and EU) are now assisting Arabs in the persecution and expulsion again. Attempting to set the conditions for an Israel with indefensible borders to make Israel vulnerable in the future. SO, today, the Zionist has moved to a Tier II - the protection and preservation of the nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

I'm thinking the revisionists would like to engage in all kinds of antisemitic lingo disguised as anti zionistic relying on the general publics ignorance of what exactly zionism is

Quote
Until 1948, the primary goals of Zionism were the re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel ("Eretz Israel" in Hebrew), ingathering of the exiles, and liberation of Jews from the antisemitic discrimination and persecution that occurred in their diaspora. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism continues primarily to advocate on behalf of Israel and address threats to its continued existence and security.

A religious variety of Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity defined as adherence to religious Judaism, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies, and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority nation in their own state.[1] A variety of Zionism, called cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am, fostered a secular vision of a Jewish "spiritual center" in Israel. Unlike Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, Ahad Ha'am strived for Israel to be "a Jewish state and not merely a state of Jews".[8]

Advocates of Zionism view it as a national liberation movement for the repatriation of a persecuted people residing as minorities in a variety of nations, to the homeland to which they had a historical connection.
End quote

That was from WIKI

The simple reality is that zionism is simply the support of the state of Israel and the belief that it is exactly where it should be, Israel today is in the exact same spot as Judea was in ancient times. ;--)

You would be surprised what Ahad Ha'am actually wrote:


"Thus, in the spring of 1891, writing from Jerusalem, Ahad Ha'am was the first Zionist intellectual to raise the question of the Arabs. There were 3,000 Jews then in the farming settlements of Palestine and perhaps 10,000 more in the cities, among half a million Arabs. And yet, Ahad Ha'am predicted that conflict between Jews and Arabs was probable and perhaps inevitable. The Arabs, he insisted, were not "wild men of the desert" who would remain inert and uncomprehending while the Zionists built their community. "If in the course of time," he wrote, "the Jewish holding in the country should develop significantly and encroach in some degree on the Arabs, they will not easily give up their position." The clear meaning of this warning was that Palestine was not, as some early slogans proclaimed, "a land without a people" waiting for a "people without a land." All his life he kept insisting that both prudence and justice commanded the Zionists to make peace with the Arabs.

100 Years Later, a Jewish Writer's Time Has Come

 

[Roudy]

flacaltenn, et al,

I'm not sure that in 2016, there is still a credible and universally understood definition of Zionist, that everyone understands the same way.

The Zionist ship has really sailed decades ago.. And as far as Jews being split over the rationale for a "homeland" -- that is truly a non-issue today within the religion.

Zionism was an international "nationalist movement" that pretty much accomplished their goal 50 years ago. There are virtually no Jews today that want Israel to be packed into crates and moved elsewhere.

The folks that NEED a nationalist movement TODAY are the Palis. And for some damn reason -- they don't recognize how many times they've ruined that road to self-determination..

Ask me if I'm a Zionist and I'd have to think REAL HARD as to how that would be interpreted by folks who MISUSE the term constantly.. The Jews living in Israel ain't Zionists silly wabbits -- they are ISRAELIS..

(COMMENT)

I think that the Movement of the 1890's --- Zionism has run its course with the establishment of Jewish Sovereignty.

Realistically, Zionism has progressively moved from a "Nationalist Movement Promoting the Return of the Jewish People" --- to --- a "Retention and Protectionist Movement" of the Jewish Culture in Israel.

Just as Europeans will tolerate Jew as long as they recognize some benefit financially in their presence; in times of political unrest and economic disturbances Jews themselves vulnerable to persecution and the threat of expulsion. In the (roughly) 200 years prior to the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel, there were more than 15 separate incidents where people of the Jewish Culture were targeted.

• 1745 Moravia
• 1753 Lithuania
• 1761 Bordeaux
• 1772 Deported to the Western region of Imperial Russia
• 1775 Warsaw
• 1789 Alsace
• 1804-08 Russia
• 1815 Lbeck & Bremen
• 1815 Franconia, Swabia & Bavaria
• 1820 Bremen
• 1843 Russian Border Austria & Prussia
• 1866 Galatz, Romania
• 1880s Russia
• 1891 Moscow
• 1919 Bavaria (foreign born Jews)
• 1938-45 Nazi Controlled Areas
  • 107,000 departed from the Netherlands
  • 28,500 from Belgium
  • 73,000 from France
  • 770 Norway
  • 50,000 Slovakian Jews were deported
  • 430,000 Hungarian Jews were sent to Auschwitz

Now that the Jewish people have established and built-up a homeland (Israel) that they can protect from the European and Arab League persecution, the European (thru the UN and EU) are now assisting Arabs in the persecution and expulsion again. Attempting to set the conditions for an Israel with indefensible borders to make Israel vulnerable in the future. SO, today, the Zionist has moved to a Tier II - the protection and preservation of the nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

Correct, when Jews were living in foreign lands, they kept persecuting and killing them, telling them to "go back to where you came from" and when they did go back and establish their own state, now they want to destroy that state. Funny how the antisemite's brain works.

 

[Roudy]

I'm thinking the revisionists would like to engage in all kinds of antisemitic lingo disguised as anti zionistic relying on the general publics ignorance of what exactly zionism is

Quote
Until 1948, the primary goals of Zionism were the re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel ("Eretz Israel" in Hebrew), ingathering of the exiles, and liberation of Jews from the antisemitic discrimination and persecution that occurred in their diaspora. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism continues primarily to advocate on behalf of Israel and address threats to its continued existence and security.

A religious variety of Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity defined as adherence to religious Judaism, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies, and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority nation in their own state.[1] A variety of Zionism, called cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am, fostered a secular vision of a Jewish "spiritual center" in Israel. Unlike Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, Ahad Ha'am strived for Israel to be "a Jewish state and not merely a state of Jews".[8]

Advocates of Zionism view it as a national liberation movement for the repatriation of a persecuted people residing as minorities in a variety of nations, to the homeland to which they had a historical connection.
End quote

That was from WIKI

The simple reality is that zionism is simply the support of the state of Israel and the belief that it is exactly where it should be, Israel today is in the exact same spot as Judea was in ancient times. ;--)

You would be surprised what Ahad Ha'am actually wrote:


"Thus, in the spring of 1891, writing from Jerusalem, Ahad Ha'am was the first Zionist intellectual to raise the question of the Arabs. There were 3,000 Jews then in the farming settlements of Palestine and perhaps 10,000 more in the cities, among half a million Arabs. And yet, Ahad Ha'am predicted that conflict between Jews and Arabs was probable and perhaps inevitable. The Arabs, he insisted, were not "wild men of the desert" who would remain inert and uncomprehending while the Zionists built their community. "If in the course of time," he wrote, "the Jewish holding in the country should develop significantly and encroach in some degree on the Arabs, they will not easily give up their position." The clear meaning of this warning was that Palestine was not, as some early slogans proclaimed, "a land without a people" waiting for a "people without a land." All his life he kept insisting that both prudence and justice commanded the Zionists to make peace with the Arabs.

100 Years Later, a Jewish Writer's Time Has Come

Bull.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3


163. The Arabs of Palestine consider themselves as having a "natural" right to that country, although they have not been in possession of it as a sovereign nation.


166. The desire of the Arab people of Palestine to safeguard their national existence is a very natural desire. However, Palestinian nationalism, as distinct from Arab nationalism, is itself a relatively new phenomenon, which appeared only after the division of the "Arab rectangle" by the settlement of the First World War.

 

[flacaltenn]

flacaltenn, et al,

I'm not sure that in 2016, there is still a credible and universally understood definition of Zionist, that everyone understands the same way.

The Zionist ship has really sailed decades ago.. And as far as Jews being split over the rationale for a "homeland" -- that is truly a non-issue today within the religion.

Zionism was an international "nationalist movement" that pretty much accomplished their goal 50 years ago. There are virtually no Jews today that want Israel to be packed into crates and moved elsewhere.

The folks that NEED a nationalist movement TODAY are the Palis. And for some damn reason -- they don't recognize how many times they've ruined that road to self-determination..

Ask me if I'm a Zionist and I'd have to think REAL HARD as to how that would be interpreted by folks who MISUSE the term constantly.. The Jews living in Israel ain't Zionists silly wabbits -- they are ISRAELIS..

(COMMENT)

I think that the Movement of the 1890's --- Zionism has run its course with the establishment of Jewish Sovereignty.

Realistically, Zionism has progressively moved from a "Nationalist Movement Promoting the Return of the Jewish People" --- to --- a "Retention and Protectionist Movement" of the Jewish Culture in Israel.

Just as Europeans will tolerate Jew as long as they recognize some benefit financially in their presence; in times of political unrest and economic disturbances Jews themselves vulnerable to persecution and the threat of expulsion. In the (roughly) 200 years prior to the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel, there were more than 15 separate incidents where people of the Jewish Culture were targeted.

• 1745 Moravia
• 1753 Lithuania
• 1761 Bordeaux
• 1772 Deported to the Western region of Imperial Russia
• 1775 Warsaw
• 1789 Alsace
• 1804-08 Russia
• 1815 Lbeck & Bremen
• 1815 Franconia, Swabia & Bavaria
• 1820 Bremen
• 1843 Russian Border Austria & Prussia
• 1866 Galatz, Romania
• 1880s Russia
• 1891 Moscow
• 1919 Bavaria (foreign born Jews)
• 1938-45 Nazi Controlled Areas
  • 107,000 departed from the Netherlands
  • 28,500 from Belgium
  • 73,000 from France
  • 770 Norway
  • 50,000 Slovakian Jews were deported
  • 430,000 Hungarian Jews were sent to Auschwitz

Now that the Jewish people have established and built-up a homeland (Israel) that they can protect from the European and Arab League persecution, the European (thru the UN and EU) are now assisting Arabs in the persecution and expulsion again. Attempting to set the conditions for an Israel with indefensible borders to make Israel vulnerable in the future. SO, today, the Zionist has moved to a Tier II - the protection and preservation of the nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

Actually Rocco -- this theory that -----

Realistically, Zionism has progressively moved from a "Nationalist Movement Promoting the Return of the Jewish People" --- to --- a "Retention and Protectionist Movement" of the Jewish Culture in Israel.

---- is a nice touch.. But it's not really necessary. Zionists now officially gather only every 10 years or so -- and it's become more of a weird "Israeli Chamber of Commerce" meets Woodstock type of event. Now filled with "Green Jew" environmentalists and every other special interest. NOBODY CARES.. Not even dedicated religious temple dues-paying Jews..

The only contribution of self-avowed Zionists today to the tensions is their emphasis on maintaining the "jewish identity" of Israel. Which is an INTERNAL decision for Israelis to make -- just like our ability to control the racial/ethnic/religious substance of this here US of A..

 

[flacaltenn]

If the Knesset actually gave a fart about the Zionist Congress today -- they'd demand "observer status" or some actual voting seats in the meetings..

 

[Elvis Obama]

What's with this article is that it's a reflection of bizarre mindset. A mindset that creates false equivalencies and apportions blame in a one-sided fashion.

There is no blame. It is raw nature that's at work. A scenario that has played out over and over again throughout history. A clash of civilizations. There is a great deal of effort made to characterize the conflict differently. To ignore the social and cultural differences which have made compromise impossible. Why?

Has Israel transgressed? Absolutely. They won, though. Throughout their history they have won. They won statehood and they've won several direct military confrontations. The Arabs, quite naturally, have switched their tactics to terrorism and to manipulating public opinion, which they have succeeded in doing. A true nation would compromise, would recognize defeat and offer unconditional surrender. There are no true nations in the region, Israel aside. Their motives are not the motives of modern nations, their motives are far more ancient. They are tribal and religious. It's like the Native Americans negotiating with the settlers to sell Manhattan Island.

So the victories of the Israelis have brought them to the brink of defeat, because public opinion, like the one expressed in this article, has forgotten just what lies at the heart of this conflict.

You post is slightly off topic but would make an interesting new discussion...

Sorry if I didn't directly address your question about the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. My implication was that these are terms which are being misapplied, due to the current political dynamic. The author is clearly in the camp of "everything is Israel's fault".

So within that dynamic, what is the purpose of such a question? It is to legitimize the idea of blaming all the problems in the Middle East on Israel. Hey, you don't have to worry about being called an anti-Semite, just cause you hate Israel!

There is no longer such thing as anti-Zionism. Zionism ended in 1948. What does it mean to call yourself anti-Zionist in 2016? You're anti-Israel? What does that mean? Intent on seeing Israel destroyed? Reduced to 1948 borders? Morally outraged by Israel's barbaric treatment of barbaric people?

There's still such a thing as anti-Semitic. There is, in fact, religiously mandated conflict with the people of Israel. These people are legitimate anti-Zionists. They would roll back the state of Israel with nuclear weapons if they could. They have never and will never accept the state of Israel. I would expect that the Venn diagram of the two groups has a large overlap.

Who's the target audience for the article you posted? Liberals. This has become a pet issue for some liberals. Why? Because there are very legitimate civil rights issues involved, or because it is Israelis denying civil rights instead of Arabs, the way it is in every other nation in the ME? What is behind their focus on this issue? I can't say. Some latent anti-Semitism? Bleeding hearts for an issue that's in the news a lot?

 

[montelatici]

I'm thinking the revisionists would like to engage in all kinds of antisemitic lingo disguised as anti zionistic relying on the general publics ignorance of what exactly zionism is

Quote
Until 1948, the primary goals of Zionism were the re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel ("Eretz Israel" in Hebrew), ingathering of the exiles, and liberation of Jews from the antisemitic discrimination and persecution that occurred in their diaspora. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism continues primarily to advocate on behalf of Israel and address threats to its continued existence and security.

A religious variety of Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity defined as adherence to religious Judaism, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies, and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority nation in their own state.[1] A variety of Zionism, called cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am, fostered a secular vision of a Jewish "spiritual center" in Israel. Unlike Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, Ahad Ha'am strived for Israel to be "a Jewish state and not merely a state of Jews".[8]

Advocates of Zionism view it as a national liberation movement for the repatriation of a persecuted people residing as minorities in a variety of nations, to the homeland to which they had a historical connection.
End quote

That was from WIKI

The simple reality is that zionism is simply the support of the state of Israel and the belief that it is exactly where it should be, Israel today is in the exact same spot as Judea was in ancient times. ;--)

You would be surprised what Ahad Ha'am actually wrote:


"Thus, in the spring of 1891, writing from Jerusalem, Ahad Ha'am was the first Zionist intellectual to raise the question of the Arabs. There were 3,000 Jews then in the farming settlements of Palestine and perhaps 10,000 more in the cities, among half a million Arabs. And yet, Ahad Ha'am predicted that conflict between Jews and Arabs was probable and perhaps inevitable. The Arabs, he insisted, were not "wild men of the desert" who would remain inert and uncomprehending while the Zionists built their community. "If in the course of time," he wrote, "the Jewish holding in the country should develop significantly and encroach in some degree on the Arabs, they will not easily give up their position." The clear meaning of this warning was that Palestine was not, as some early slogans proclaimed, "a land without a people" waiting for a "people without a land." All his life he kept insisting that both prudence and justice commanded the Zionists to make peace with the Arabs.

100 Years Later, a Jewish Writer's Time Has Come

Bull.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3


163. The Arabs of Palestine consider themselves as having a "natural" right to that country, although they have not been in possession of it as a sovereign nation.


166. The desire of the Arab people of Palestine to safeguard their national existence is a very natural desire. However, Palestinian nationalism, as distinct from Arab nationalism, is itself a relatively new phenomenon, which appeared only after the division of the "Arab rectangle" by the settlement of the First World War.

What does that nonsense have to do with Ahad Ha'am's statement? Do you even know who he is?

From your reference :

"148. When the Mandate was approved, all concerned were aware of the existence of an overwhelming Arab majority in Palestine. More over, the King-Crane Report, among others, had warned that the Zionist program could not be carried out except by force of arms. It would seem clear, therefore, that the provisions of the Mandate relating to the Jewish National Home could be based only on the assumption that sooner or later the Arab fears would gradually be overcome and that Arab hostility to the terms of the Mandate would in time weaken and disappear.

149. This seems to have been the basic assumption, but it proved to be a false one, since the history of the last twenty-five years has established the fact that not only the creation of a Jewish State but even the continuation of the building of the Jewish National Home by restricted immigration could be implemented only by the use of some considerable force. It cannot be properly contended that the use of force as a means of establishing the National Home was either intended by the Mandate or implied by its provisions. On the contrary, the provisions of the Mandate should preclude any systematic use of force for the purpose of its application. In its preamble, the Mandate states that the Principal Allied Powers agreed to entrust Palestine to a mandatory Power for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.147/ The guiding principle of that Article was the well-being of peoples not yet able to stand by themselves."

150. It has been suggested that the well-being of the indigenous population of Palestine might be ensured by the unfettered development of the Jewish National Home, "Well-being" in a practical sense, however, must be something more than a mere objective conception; and the Arabs, thinking subjectively, have demonstrated by their acts their belief that the conversion of Palestine into a Jewish State against their will would be very much opposed to their conception of what is essential to their well-being. To contend, therefore, that there is an international obligation to the effect that Jewish immigration should continue with a view to establishing a Jewish majority in the whole of Palestine, would mean ignoring the wishes of the Arab population and their views as to their own well-being. This would involve an apparent violation of what was the governing principle of Article 22 of the Covenant.



As I have always contended Britain violated the terms of the Covenant of the United Nations. You lose. Hoisted by your own petard, as they say. LOL

 

[Roudy]

I'm thinking the revisionists would like to engage in all kinds of antisemitic lingo disguised as anti zionistic relying on the general publics ignorance of what exactly zionism is

Quote
Until 1948, the primary goals of Zionism were the re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel ("Eretz Israel" in Hebrew), ingathering of the exiles, and liberation of Jews from the antisemitic discrimination and persecution that occurred in their diaspora. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism continues primarily to advocate on behalf of Israel and address threats to its continued existence and security.

A religious variety of Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity defined as adherence to religious Judaism, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies, and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority nation in their own state.[1] A variety of Zionism, called cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am, fostered a secular vision of a Jewish "spiritual center" in Israel. Unlike Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, Ahad Ha'am strived for Israel to be "a Jewish state and not merely a state of Jews".[8]

Advocates of Zionism view it as a national liberation movement for the repatriation of a persecuted people residing as minorities in a variety of nations, to the homeland to which they had a historical connection.
End quote

That was from WIKI

The simple reality is that zionism is simply the support of the state of Israel and the belief that it is exactly where it should be, Israel today is in the exact same spot as Judea was in ancient times. ;--)

You would be surprised what Ahad Ha'am actually wrote:


"Thus, in the spring of 1891, writing from Jerusalem, Ahad Ha'am was the first Zionist intellectual to raise the question of the Arabs. There were 3,000 Jews then in the farming settlements of Palestine and perhaps 10,000 more in the cities, among half a million Arabs. And yet, Ahad Ha'am predicted that conflict between Jews and Arabs was probable and perhaps inevitable. The Arabs, he insisted, were not "wild men of the desert" who would remain inert and uncomprehending while the Zionists built their community. "If in the course of time," he wrote, "the Jewish holding in the country should develop significantly and encroach in some degree on the Arabs, they will not easily give up their position." The clear meaning of this warning was that Palestine was not, as some early slogans proclaimed, "a land without a people" waiting for a "people without a land." All his life he kept insisting that both prudence and justice commanded the Zionists to make peace with the Arabs.

100 Years Later, a Jewish Writer's Time Has Come

Bull.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3


163. The Arabs of Palestine consider themselves as having a "natural" right to that country, although they have not been in possession of it as a sovereign nation.


166. The desire of the Arab people of Palestine to safeguard their national existence is a very natural desire. However, Palestinian nationalism, as distinct from Arab nationalism, is itself a relatively new phenomenon, which appeared only after the division of the "Arab rectangle" by the settlement of the First World War.

What does that nonsense have to do with Ahad Ha'am's statement? Do you even know who he is?

From your reference :

"148. When the Mandate was approved, all concerned were aware of the existence of an overwhelming Arab majority in Palestine. More over, the King-Crane Report, among others, had warned that the Zionist program could not be carried out except by force of arms. It would seem clear, therefore, that the provisions of the Mandate relating to the Jewish National Home could be based only on the assumption that sooner or later the Arab fears would gradually be overcome and that Arab hostility to the terms of the Mandate would in time weaken and disappear.

149. This seems to have been the basic assumption, but it proved to be a false one, since the history of the last twenty-five years has established the fact that not only the creation of a Jewish State but even the continuation of the building of the Jewish National Home by restricted immigration could be implemented only by the use of some considerable force. It cannot be properly contended that the use of force as a means of establishing the National Home was either intended by the Mandate or implied by its provisions. On the contrary, the provisions of the Mandate should preclude any systematic use of force for the purpose of its application. In its preamble, the Mandate states that the Principal Allied Powers agreed to entrust Palestine to a mandatory Power for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.147/ The guiding principle of that Article was the well-being of peoples not yet able to stand by themselves."

150. It has been suggested that the well-being of the indigenous population of Palestine might be ensured by the unfettered development of the Jewish National Home, "Well-being" in a practical sense, however, must be something more than a mere objective conception; and the Arabs, thinking subjectively, have demonstrated by their acts their belief that the conversion of Palestine into a Jewish State against their will would be very much opposed to their conception of what is essential to their well-being. To contend, therefore, that there is an international obligation to the effect that Jewish immigration should continue with a view to establishing a Jewish majority in the whole of Palestine, would mean ignoring the wishes of the Arab population and their views as to their own well-being. This would involve an apparent violation of what was the governing principle of Article 22 of the Covenant.



As I have always contended Britain violated the terms of the Covenant of the United Nations. You lose. Hoisted by your own petard, as they say. LOL

Ha ha ha. coming from someone who gets hung by his own soiled IslamoNazi underwear. You quote the British when it's convenient, and discount them when it isn't.

The Arabs refused the creation of the Jewish state by the UN, attacked it, and got their butts kicked, and the rest of a history of Arabs getting their butts kicked.

Bottom line Israel is and will be, Palestine never was and never will be.

Now repeat after me: "Inshallah". Ha ha ha.

 

[montelatici]

I'm thinking the revisionists would like to engage in all kinds of antisemitic lingo disguised as anti zionistic relying on the general publics ignorance of what exactly zionism is

Quote
Until 1948, the primary goals of Zionism were the re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel ("Eretz Israel" in Hebrew), ingathering of the exiles, and liberation of Jews from the antisemitic discrimination and persecution that occurred in their diaspora. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism continues primarily to advocate on behalf of Israel and address threats to its continued existence and security.

A religious variety of Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity defined as adherence to religious Judaism, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies, and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority nation in their own state.[1] A variety of Zionism, called cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am, fostered a secular vision of a Jewish "spiritual center" in Israel. Unlike Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, Ahad Ha'am strived for Israel to be "a Jewish state and not merely a state of Jews".[8]

Advocates of Zionism view it as a national liberation movement for the repatriation of a persecuted people residing as minorities in a variety of nations, to the homeland to which they had a historical connection.
End quote

That was from WIKI

The simple reality is that zionism is simply the support of the state of Israel and the belief that it is exactly where it should be, Israel today is in the exact same spot as Judea was in ancient times. ;--)

You would be surprised what Ahad Ha'am actually wrote:


"Thus, in the spring of 1891, writing from Jerusalem, Ahad Ha'am was the first Zionist intellectual to raise the question of the Arabs. There were 3,000 Jews then in the farming settlements of Palestine and perhaps 10,000 more in the cities, among half a million Arabs. And yet, Ahad Ha'am predicted that conflict between Jews and Arabs was probable and perhaps inevitable. The Arabs, he insisted, were not "wild men of the desert" who would remain inert and uncomprehending while the Zionists built their community. "If in the course of time," he wrote, "the Jewish holding in the country should develop significantly and encroach in some degree on the Arabs, they will not easily give up their position." The clear meaning of this warning was that Palestine was not, as some early slogans proclaimed, "a land without a people" waiting for a "people without a land." All his life he kept insisting that both prudence and justice commanded the Zionists to make peace with the Arabs.

100 Years Later, a Jewish Writer's Time Has Come

Bull.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3


163. The Arabs of Palestine consider themselves as having a "natural" right to that country, although they have not been in possession of it as a sovereign nation.


166. The desire of the Arab people of Palestine to safeguard their national existence is a very natural desire. However, Palestinian nationalism, as distinct from Arab nationalism, is itself a relatively new phenomenon, which appeared only after the division of the "Arab rectangle" by the settlement of the First World War.

What does that nonsense have to do with Ahad Ha'am's statement? Do you even know who he is?

From your reference :

"148. When the Mandate was approved, all concerned were aware of the existence of an overwhelming Arab majority in Palestine. More over, the King-Crane Report, among others, had warned that the Zionist program could not be carried out except by force of arms. It would seem clear, therefore, that the provisions of the Mandate relating to the Jewish National Home could be based only on the assumption that sooner or later the Arab fears would gradually be overcome and that Arab hostility to the terms of the Mandate would in time weaken and disappear.

149. This seems to have been the basic assumption, but it proved to be a false one, since the history of the last twenty-five years has established the fact that not only the creation of a Jewish State but even the continuation of the building of the Jewish National Home by restricted immigration could be implemented only by the use of some considerable force. It cannot be properly contended that the use of force as a means of establishing the National Home was either intended by the Mandate or implied by its provisions. On the contrary, the provisions of the Mandate should preclude any systematic use of force for the purpose of its application. In its preamble, the Mandate states that the Principal Allied Powers agreed to entrust Palestine to a mandatory Power for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.147/ The guiding principle of that Article was the well-being of peoples not yet able to stand by themselves."

150. It has been suggested that the well-being of the indigenous population of Palestine might be ensured by the unfettered development of the Jewish National Home, "Well-being" in a practical sense, however, must be something more than a mere objective conception; and the Arabs, thinking subjectively, have demonstrated by their acts their belief that the conversion of Palestine into a Jewish State against their will would be very much opposed to their conception of what is essential to their well-being. To contend, therefore, that there is an international obligation to the effect that Jewish immigration should continue with a view to establishing a Jewish majority in the whole of Palestine, would mean ignoring the wishes of the Arab population and their views as to their own well-being. This would involve an apparent violation of what was the governing principle of Article 22 of the Covenant.



As I have always contended Britain violated the terms of the Covenant of the United Nations. You lose. Hoisted by your own petard, as they say. LOL

Ha ha ha. coming from someone who gets hung by his own soiled IslamoNazi underwear. You quote the British when it's convenient, and discount them when it isn't.

The Arabs refused the creation of the Jewish state by the UN, attacked it, and got their butts kicked, and the rest of a history of Arabs getting their butts kicked.

Bottom line Israel is and will be, Palestine never was and never will be.

Now repeat after me: "Inshallah". Ha ha ha.

The Palestinians refused to be colonized by Europeans. I haven't heard of any people that did not resist colonization.

 

[Roudy]

I'm thinking the revisionists would like to engage in all kinds of antisemitic lingo disguised as anti zionistic relying on the general publics ignorance of what exactly zionism is

Quote
Until 1948, the primary goals of Zionism were the re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel ("Eretz Israel" in Hebrew), ingathering of the exiles, and liberation of Jews from the antisemitic discrimination and persecution that occurred in their diaspora. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism continues primarily to advocate on behalf of Israel and address threats to its continued existence and security.

A religious variety of Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity defined as adherence to religious Judaism, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies, and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority nation in their own state.[1] A variety of Zionism, called cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am, fostered a secular vision of a Jewish "spiritual center" in Israel. Unlike Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, Ahad Ha'am strived for Israel to be "a Jewish state and not merely a state of Jews".[8]

Advocates of Zionism view it as a national liberation movement for the repatriation of a persecuted people residing as minorities in a variety of nations, to the homeland to which they had a historical connection.
End quote

That was from WIKI

The simple reality is that zionism is simply the support of the state of Israel and the belief that it is exactly where it should be, Israel today is in the exact same spot as Judea was in ancient times. ;--)

You would be surprised what Ahad Ha'am actually wrote:


"Thus, in the spring of 1891, writing from Jerusalem, Ahad Ha'am was the first Zionist intellectual to raise the question of the Arabs. There were 3,000 Jews then in the farming settlements of Palestine and perhaps 10,000 more in the cities, among half a million Arabs. And yet, Ahad Ha'am predicted that conflict between Jews and Arabs was probable and perhaps inevitable. The Arabs, he insisted, were not "wild men of the desert" who would remain inert and uncomprehending while the Zionists built their community. "If in the course of time," he wrote, "the Jewish holding in the country should develop significantly and encroach in some degree on the Arabs, they will not easily give up their position." The clear meaning of this warning was that Palestine was not, as some early slogans proclaimed, "a land without a people" waiting for a "people without a land." All his life he kept insisting that both prudence and justice commanded the Zionists to make peace with the Arabs.

100 Years Later, a Jewish Writer's Time Has Come

Bull.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3


163. The Arabs of Palestine consider themselves as having a "natural" right to that country, although they have not been in possession of it as a sovereign nation.


166. The desire of the Arab people of Palestine to safeguard their national existence is a very natural desire. However, Palestinian nationalism, as distinct from Arab nationalism, is itself a relatively new phenomenon, which appeared only after the division of the "Arab rectangle" by the settlement of the First World War.

What does that nonsense have to do with Ahad Ha'am's statement? Do you even know who he is?

From your reference :

"148. When the Mandate was approved, all concerned were aware of the existence of an overwhelming Arab majority in Palestine. More over, the King-Crane Report, among others, had warned that the Zionist program could not be carried out except by force of arms. It would seem clear, therefore, that the provisions of the Mandate relating to the Jewish National Home could be based only on the assumption that sooner or later the Arab fears would gradually be overcome and that Arab hostility to the terms of the Mandate would in time weaken and disappear.

149. This seems to have been the basic assumption, but it proved to be a false one, since the history of the last twenty-five years has established the fact that not only the creation of a Jewish State but even the continuation of the building of the Jewish National Home by restricted immigration could be implemented only by the use of some considerable force. It cannot be properly contended that the use of force as a means of establishing the National Home was either intended by the Mandate or implied by its provisions. On the contrary, the provisions of the Mandate should preclude any systematic use of force for the purpose of its application. In its preamble, the Mandate states that the Principal Allied Powers agreed to entrust Palestine to a mandatory Power for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.147/ The guiding principle of that Article was the well-being of peoples not yet able to stand by themselves."

150. It has been suggested that the well-being of the indigenous population of Palestine might be ensured by the unfettered development of the Jewish National Home, "Well-being" in a practical sense, however, must be something more than a mere objective conception; and the Arabs, thinking subjectively, have demonstrated by their acts their belief that the conversion of Palestine into a Jewish State against their will would be very much opposed to their conception of what is essential to their well-being. To contend, therefore, that there is an international obligation to the effect that Jewish immigration should continue with a view to establishing a Jewish majority in the whole of Palestine, would mean ignoring the wishes of the Arab population and their views as to their own well-being. This would involve an apparent violation of what was the governing principle of Article 22 of the Covenant.



As I have always contended Britain violated the terms of the Covenant of the United Nations. You lose. Hoisted by your own petard, as they say. LOL

Ha ha ha. coming from someone who gets hung by his own soiled IslamoNazi underwear. You quote the British when it's convenient, and discount them when it isn't.

The Arabs refused the creation of the Jewish state by the UN, attacked it, and got their butts kicked, and the rest of a history of Arabs getting their butts kicked.

Bottom line Israel is and will be, Palestine never was and never will be.

Now repeat after me: "Inshallah". Ha ha ha.

The Palestinians refused to be colonized by Europeans. I haven't heard of any people that did not resist colonization.

And the Jews refused to be killed by IslamoNazi savages. There were no "Palestinians" back then, just Arab invaders.

From The Armenian Genocide (1914-1924) to the Arab Genocide (1917-today)

1917

Pan-Islamic Vision Comes to Palestine

Amin Al-Husseini returns to Palestine. He brings with him lessons of genocide and the vision of leading a Pan-Islamic empire, where Jews and Christians are not acceptable.

Amin Al-Husseini : Root of Today’s Palestinian Tragedy
1920

The Violence Begins

1920/1921. Riots. Amin Al-Husseini becomes lead figure in organizing riots against locals. Amin Al-Husseini begins life-long campaign of inciting hate between Jews and Muslims under British Mandate of Palestine. He begins rule of terror over local Muslim leaders, who denounce him as an ignorant thug. [iv]

1922

Head of Supreme Muslim Council

Amin Al-Husseini is appointed Head of Supreme Muslim Council (1922-1937)[vi] . He is hugely disappointed by the end of the Ottoman Empire under Ataturk. Husseini becomes fanaticized by the idea that he must restore the lost Islamic Empire. He vows to fight all Muslim seculars.

1922

Jerusalem Capital

Amin Al-Husseini implements restoration of Dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem[vii] . He has the Dome gold-plated for the first time. Thereafter, Jerusalem takes on more importance as Holy Muslim site in the eyes of the Arab World.

1928

Husseini Joins Muslim Brotherhood

Muslim Brotherhood established in Egypt by Hassan El Banna[viii] in 1928. Amin Al-Husseini becomes a central member and ideological inspiration[ix] for the Muslim Brotherhood. Mother organization for today’s Egyptian Islamic Jihad and Hamas[x] . The Muslim Brotherhood preaches Wahhabi Islam[xi] , which justifies violent means to rid the ‘Muslim world’ of its non-Islamic element. It envisions a Pan-Islamic Empire, where strict Islamic law rules over all.

1929
Hebron Massacre

Amin Al-Husseini organizes more riots in Palestine. He spreads false rumors to further turn the local Muslims against the Jews. Random murdering of Hebron Jews begins. Hebron Jewish community was over 2,000 years old.

 

[montelatici]

You would be surprised what Ahad Ha'am actually wrote:


"Thus, in the spring of 1891, writing from Jerusalem, Ahad Ha'am was the first Zionist intellectual to raise the question of the Arabs. There were 3,000 Jews then in the farming settlements of Palestine and perhaps 10,000 more in the cities, among half a million Arabs. And yet, Ahad Ha'am predicted that conflict between Jews and Arabs was probable and perhaps inevitable. The Arabs, he insisted, were not "wild men of the desert" who would remain inert and uncomprehending while the Zionists built their community. "If in the course of time," he wrote, "the Jewish holding in the country should develop significantly and encroach in some degree on the Arabs, they will not easily give up their position." The clear meaning of this warning was that Palestine was not, as some early slogans proclaimed, "a land without a people" waiting for a "people without a land." All his life he kept insisting that both prudence and justice commanded the Zionists to make peace with the Arabs.

100 Years Later, a Jewish Writer's Time Has Come

Bull.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3


163. The Arabs of Palestine consider themselves as having a "natural" right to that country, although they have not been in possession of it as a sovereign nation.


166. The desire of the Arab people of Palestine to safeguard their national existence is a very natural desire. However, Palestinian nationalism, as distinct from Arab nationalism, is itself a relatively new phenomenon, which appeared only after the division of the "Arab rectangle" by the settlement of the First World War.

What does that nonsense have to do with Ahad Ha'am's statement? Do you even know who he is?

From your reference :

"148. When the Mandate was approved, all concerned were aware of the existence of an overwhelming Arab majority in Palestine. More over, the King-Crane Report, among others, had warned that the Zionist program could not be carried out except by force of arms. It would seem clear, therefore, that the provisions of the Mandate relating to the Jewish National Home could be based only on the assumption that sooner or later the Arab fears would gradually be overcome and that Arab hostility to the terms of the Mandate would in time weaken and disappear.

149. This seems to have been the basic assumption, but it proved to be a false one, since the history of the last twenty-five years has established the fact that not only the creation of a Jewish State but even the continuation of the building of the Jewish National Home by restricted immigration could be implemented only by the use of some considerable force. It cannot be properly contended that the use of force as a means of establishing the National Home was either intended by the Mandate or implied by its provisions. On the contrary, the provisions of the Mandate should preclude any systematic use of force for the purpose of its application. In its preamble, the Mandate states that the Principal Allied Powers agreed to entrust Palestine to a mandatory Power for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.147/ The guiding principle of that Article was the well-being of peoples not yet able to stand by themselves."

150. It has been suggested that the well-being of the indigenous population of Palestine might be ensured by the unfettered development of the Jewish National Home, "Well-being" in a practical sense, however, must be something more than a mere objective conception; and the Arabs, thinking subjectively, have demonstrated by their acts their belief that the conversion of Palestine into a Jewish State against their will would be very much opposed to their conception of what is essential to their well-being. To contend, therefore, that there is an international obligation to the effect that Jewish immigration should continue with a view to establishing a Jewish majority in the whole of Palestine, would mean ignoring the wishes of the Arab population and their views as to their own well-being. This would involve an apparent violation of what was the governing principle of Article 22 of the Covenant.



As I have always contended Britain violated the terms of the Covenant of the United Nations. You lose. Hoisted by your own petard, as they say. LOL

Ha ha ha. coming from someone who gets hung by his own soiled IslamoNazi underwear. You quote the British when it's convenient, and discount them when it isn't.

The Arabs refused the creation of the Jewish state by the UN, attacked it, and got their butts kicked, and the rest of a history of Arabs getting their butts kicked.

Bottom line Israel is and will be, Palestine never was and never will be.

Now repeat after me: "Inshallah". Ha ha ha.

The Palestinians refused to be colonized by Europeans. I haven't heard of any people that did not resist colonization.

And the Jews refused to be killed by IslamoNazi savages. There were no "Palestinians" back then, just Arab invaders.

From The Armenian Genocide (1914-1924) to the Arab Genocide (1917-today)

1917

Pan-Islamic Vision Comes to Palestine

Amin Al-Husseini returns to Palestine. He brings with him lessons of genocide and the vision of leading a Pan-Islamic empire, where Jews and Christians are not acceptable.

Amin Al-Husseini : Root of Today’s Palestinian Tragedy
1920

The Violence Begins

1920/1921. Riots. Amin Al-Husseini becomes lead figure in organizing riots against locals. Amin Al-Husseini begins life-long campaign of inciting hate between Jews and Muslims under British Mandate of Palestine. He begins rule of terror over local Muslim leaders, who denounce him as an ignorant thug. [iv]

1922

Head of Supreme Muslim Council

Amin Al-Husseini is appointed Head of Supreme Muslim Council (1922-1937)[vi] . He is hugely disappointed by the end of the Ottoman Empire under Ataturk. Husseini becomes fanaticized by the idea that he must restore the lost Islamic Empire. He vows to fight all Muslim seculars.

1922

Jerusalem Capital

Amin Al-Husseini implements restoration of Dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem[vii] . He has the Dome gold-plated for the first time. Thereafter, Jerusalem takes on more importance as Holy Muslim site in the eyes of the Arab World.

1928

Husseini Joins Muslim Brotherhood

Muslim Brotherhood established in Egypt by Hassan El Banna[viii] in 1928. Amin Al-Husseini becomes a central member and ideological inspiration[ix] for the Muslim Brotherhood. Mother organization for today’s Egyptian Islamic Jihad and Hamas[x] . The Muslim Brotherhood preaches Wahhabi Islam[xi] , which justifies violent means to rid the ‘Muslim world’ of its non-Islamic element. It envisions a Pan-Islamic Empire, where strict Islamic law rules over all.

1929
Hebron Massacre

Amin Al-Husseini organizes more riots in Palestine. He spreads false rumors to further turn the local Muslims against the Jews. Random murdering of Hebron Jews begins. Hebron Jewish community was over 2,000 years old.

The rumors were apparently not false. The European Jews intended to evict and/or murder the Christians and Muslims of Palestine.

 

[Roudy]

Bull.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3


163. The Arabs of Palestine consider themselves as having a "natural" right to that country, although they have not been in possession of it as a sovereign nation.


166. The desire of the Arab people of Palestine to safeguard their national existence is a very natural desire. However, Palestinian nationalism, as distinct from Arab nationalism, is itself a relatively new phenomenon, which appeared only after the division of the "Arab rectangle" by the settlement of the First World War.

What does that nonsense have to do with Ahad Ha'am's statement? Do you even know who he is?

From your reference :

"148. When the Mandate was approved, all concerned were aware of the existence of an overwhelming Arab majority in Palestine. More over, the King-Crane Report, among others, had warned that the Zionist program could not be carried out except by force of arms. It would seem clear, therefore, that the provisions of the Mandate relating to the Jewish National Home could be based only on the assumption that sooner or later the Arab fears would gradually be overcome and that Arab hostility to the terms of the Mandate would in time weaken and disappear.

149. This seems to have been the basic assumption, but it proved to be a false one, since the history of the last twenty-five years has established the fact that not only the creation of a Jewish State but even the continuation of the building of the Jewish National Home by restricted immigration could be implemented only by the use of some considerable force. It cannot be properly contended that the use of force as a means of establishing the National Home was either intended by the Mandate or implied by its provisions. On the contrary, the provisions of the Mandate should preclude any systematic use of force for the purpose of its application. In its preamble, the Mandate states that the Principal Allied Powers agreed to entrust Palestine to a mandatory Power for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.147/ The guiding principle of that Article was the well-being of peoples not yet able to stand by themselves."

150. It has been suggested that the well-being of the indigenous population of Palestine might be ensured by the unfettered development of the Jewish National Home, "Well-being" in a practical sense, however, must be something more than a mere objective conception; and the Arabs, thinking subjectively, have demonstrated by their acts their belief that the conversion of Palestine into a Jewish State against their will would be very much opposed to their conception of what is essential to their well-being. To contend, therefore, that there is an international obligation to the effect that Jewish immigration should continue with a view to establishing a Jewish majority in the whole of Palestine, would mean ignoring the wishes of the Arab population and their views as to their own well-being. This would involve an apparent violation of what was the governing principle of Article 22 of the Covenant.



As I have always contended Britain violated the terms of the Covenant of the United Nations. You lose. Hoisted by your own petard, as they say. LOL

Ha ha ha. coming from someone who gets hung by his own soiled IslamoNazi underwear. You quote the British when it's convenient, and discount them when it isn't.

The Arabs refused the creation of the Jewish state by the UN, attacked it, and got their butts kicked, and the rest of a history of Arabs getting their butts kicked.

Bottom line Israel is and will be, Palestine never was and never will be.

Now repeat after me: "Inshallah". Ha ha ha.

The Palestinians refused to be colonized by Europeans. I haven't heard of any people that did not resist colonization.

And the Jews refused to be killed by IslamoNazi savages. There were no "Palestinians" back then, just Arab invaders.

From The Armenian Genocide (1914-1924) to the Arab Genocide (1917-today)

1917

Pan-Islamic Vision Comes to Palestine

Amin Al-Husseini returns to Palestine. He brings with him lessons of genocide and the vision of leading a Pan-Islamic empire, where Jews and Christians are not acceptable.

Amin Al-Husseini : Root of Today’s Palestinian Tragedy
1920

The Violence Begins

1920/1921. Riots. Amin Al-Husseini becomes lead figure in organizing riots against locals. Amin Al-Husseini begins life-long campaign of inciting hate between Jews and Muslims under British Mandate of Palestine. He begins rule of terror over local Muslim leaders, who denounce him as an ignorant thug. [iv]

1922

Head of Supreme Muslim Council

Amin Al-Husseini is appointed Head of Supreme Muslim Council (1922-1937)[vi] . He is hugely disappointed by the end of the Ottoman Empire under Ataturk. Husseini becomes fanaticized by the idea that he must restore the lost Islamic Empire. He vows to fight all Muslim seculars.

1922

Jerusalem Capital

Amin Al-Husseini implements restoration of Dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem[vii] . He has the Dome gold-plated for the first time. Thereafter, Jerusalem takes on more importance as Holy Muslim site in the eyes of the Arab World.

1928

Husseini Joins Muslim Brotherhood

Muslim Brotherhood established in Egypt by Hassan El Banna[viii] in 1928. Amin Al-Husseini becomes a central member and ideological inspiration[ix] for the Muslim Brotherhood. Mother organization for today’s Egyptian Islamic Jihad and Hamas[x] . The Muslim Brotherhood preaches Wahhabi Islam[xi] , which justifies violent means to rid the ‘Muslim world’ of its non-Islamic element. It envisions a Pan-Islamic Empire, where strict Islamic law rules over all.

1929
Hebron Massacre

Amin Al-Husseini organizes more riots in Palestine. He spreads false rumors to further turn the local Muslims against the Jews. Random murdering of Hebron Jews begins. Hebron Jewish community was over 2,000 years old.

The rumors were apparently not false. The European Jews intended to evict and/or murder the Christians and Muslims of Palestine.

No false rumors, today's Palestinians are the bastard children of the marriage between Nazism, and Arab Islamic nationalism. You cannot change history.

HUSSEINI : “Murder The Jews! Murder Them All!”
1946

Yasser Arafat’s Teacher and Uncle:

Amin Al-Husseini

Egyptian-born Yasser Arafat[xlii] meets Amin Al-Husseini at age 17 and starts to work for him. Amin Al-Husseini allegedly great-uncle of Arafat, whose real name is Mohammed Abder Rauf Arafat Al-Kudwa Al-Husseini. Arafat reportedly changed his name intentionally to disguise his connection to Amin al-Husseini.

Arafat

Holy Struggler

Amin Al-Husseini places Yasser Arafat in charge of arms procurement and shipment for the Mufti’s Irregular Forces: “The Holy Strugglers”

1948-1949

Husseini:

“I declare a Holy War!”

Amin Al Husseini
with Abdel Nasser: President of Egypt.
With UN recognition, Israel declares statehood. Arab League immediately declares Jihad (Holy War) against Israel. Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Jordan immediately declare war on the new Jewish state and invade Israel.

Amin Al-Husseini[xliii] : “I declare a Holy War, My Muslim Brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all!”

Muslim Nazi Troops of Amin Al Husseini. Holy War. 1943.

Arafat Speaks On Amin Al-Husseini

“I was one of his troops.”

Yasser Arafat was interviewed by Al Sharq Al Awsat (London Arabic Daily) and reprinted in Palestinian daily Al Quds on August 2, 2002:

“We are not Afghanistan… We are the mighty people. Were they able to replace our hero Hajj Amin Al-Husseini?… There were a number of attempts to get rid of Hajj Amin, when they considered him an ally of the Nazis. But even so, he lived in Cairo, and participated in the 1948 War and I was one of his troops.”

 

[montelatici]

What does that nonsense have to do with Ahad Ha'am's statement? Do you even know who he is?

From your reference :

"148. When the Mandate was approved, all concerned were aware of the existence of an overwhelming Arab majority in Palestine. More over, the King-Crane Report, among others, had warned that the Zionist program could not be carried out except by force of arms. It would seem clear, therefore, that the provisions of the Mandate relating to the Jewish National Home could be based only on the assumption that sooner or later the Arab fears would gradually be overcome and that Arab hostility to the terms of the Mandate would in time weaken and disappear.

149. This seems to have been the basic assumption, but it proved to be a false one, since the history of the last twenty-five years has established the fact that not only the creation of a Jewish State but even the continuation of the building of the Jewish National Home by restricted immigration could be implemented only by the use of some considerable force. It cannot be properly contended that the use of force as a means of establishing the National Home was either intended by the Mandate or implied by its provisions. On the contrary, the provisions of the Mandate should preclude any systematic use of force for the purpose of its application. In its preamble, the Mandate states that the Principal Allied Powers agreed to entrust Palestine to a mandatory Power for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.147/ The guiding principle of that Article was the well-being of peoples not yet able to stand by themselves."

150. It has been suggested that the well-being of the indigenous population of Palestine might be ensured by the unfettered development of the Jewish National Home, "Well-being" in a practical sense, however, must be something more than a mere objective conception; and the Arabs, thinking subjectively, have demonstrated by their acts their belief that the conversion of Palestine into a Jewish State against their will would be very much opposed to their conception of what is essential to their well-being. To contend, therefore, that there is an international obligation to the effect that Jewish immigration should continue with a view to establishing a Jewish majority in the whole of Palestine, would mean ignoring the wishes of the Arab population and their views as to their own well-being. This would involve an apparent violation of what was the governing principle of Article 22 of the Covenant.



As I have always contended Britain violated the terms of the Covenant of the United Nations. You lose. Hoisted by your own petard, as they say. LOL

Ha ha ha. coming from someone who gets hung by his own soiled IslamoNazi underwear. You quote the British when it's convenient, and discount them when it isn't.

The Arabs refused the creation of the Jewish state by the UN, attacked it, and got their butts kicked, and the rest of a history of Arabs getting their butts kicked.

Bottom line Israel is and will be, Palestine never was and never will be.

Now repeat after me: "Inshallah". Ha ha ha.

The Palestinians refused to be colonized by Europeans. I haven't heard of any people that did not resist colonization.

And the Jews refused to be killed by IslamoNazi savages. There were no "Palestinians" back then, just Arab invaders.

From The Armenian Genocide (1914-1924) to the Arab Genocide (1917-today)

1917

Pan-Islamic Vision Comes to Palestine

Amin Al-Husseini returns to Palestine. He brings with him lessons of genocide and the vision of leading a Pan-Islamic empire, where Jews and Christians are not acceptable.

Amin Al-Husseini : Root of Today’s Palestinian Tragedy
1920

The Violence Begins

1920/1921. Riots. Amin Al-Husseini becomes lead figure in organizing riots against locals. Amin Al-Husseini begins life-long campaign of inciting hate between Jews and Muslims under British Mandate of Palestine. He begins rule of terror over local Muslim leaders, who denounce him as an ignorant thug. [iv]

1922

Head of Supreme Muslim Council

Amin Al-Husseini is appointed Head of Supreme Muslim Council (1922-1937)[vi] . He is hugely disappointed by the end of the Ottoman Empire under Ataturk. Husseini becomes fanaticized by the idea that he must restore the lost Islamic Empire. He vows to fight all Muslim seculars.

1922

Jerusalem Capital

Amin Al-Husseini implements restoration of Dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem[vii] . He has the Dome gold-plated for the first time. Thereafter, Jerusalem takes on more importance as Holy Muslim site in the eyes of the Arab World.

1928

Husseini Joins Muslim Brotherhood

Muslim Brotherhood established in Egypt by Hassan El Banna[viii] in 1928. Amin Al-Husseini becomes a central member and ideological inspiration[ix] for the Muslim Brotherhood. Mother organization for today’s Egyptian Islamic Jihad and Hamas[x] . The Muslim Brotherhood preaches Wahhabi Islam[xi] , which justifies violent means to rid the ‘Muslim world’ of its non-Islamic element. It envisions a Pan-Islamic Empire, where strict Islamic law rules over all.

1929
Hebron Massacre

Amin Al-Husseini organizes more riots in Palestine. He spreads false rumors to further turn the local Muslims against the Jews. Random murdering of Hebron Jews begins. Hebron Jewish community was over 2,000 years old.

The rumors were apparently not false. The European Jews intended to evict and/or murder the Christians and Muslims of Palestine.

No false rumors, today's Palestinians are the bastard children of the marriage between Nazism, and Arab Islamic nationalism. You cannot change history.

HUSSEINI : “Murder The Jews! Murder Them All!”
1946

Yasser Arafat’s Teacher and Uncle:

Amin Al-Husseini

Egyptian-born Yasser Arafat[xlii] meets Amin Al-Husseini at age 17 and starts to work for him. Amin Al-Husseini allegedly great-uncle of Arafat, whose real name is Mohammed Abder Rauf Arafat Al-Kudwa Al-Husseini. Arafat reportedly changed his name intentionally to disguise his connection to Amin al-Husseini.

Arafat

Holy Struggler

Amin Al-Husseini places Yasser Arafat in charge of arms procurement and shipment for the Mufti’s Irregular Forces: “The Holy Strugglers”

1948-1949

Husseini:

“I declare a Holy War!”

Amin Al Husseini
with Abdel Nasser: President of Egypt.
With UN recognition, Israel declares statehood. Arab League immediately declares Jihad (Holy War) against Israel. Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Jordan immediately declare war on the new Jewish state and invade Israel.

Amin Al-Husseini[xliii] : “I declare a Holy War, My Muslim Brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all!”

Muslim Nazi Troops of Amin Al Husseini. Holy War. 1943.

Arafat Speaks On Amin Al-Husseini

“I was one of his troops.”

Yasser Arafat was interviewed by Al Sharq Al Awsat (London Arabic Daily) and reprinted in Palestinian daily Al Quds on August 2, 2002:

“We are not Afghanistan… We are the mighty people. Were they able to replace our hero Hajj Amin Al-Husseini?… There were a number of attempts to get rid of Hajj Amin, when they considered him an ally of the Nazis. But even so, he lived in Cairo, and participated in the 1948 War and I was one of his troops.”

Is there any reason why Arafat should not have resisted European Jew colonization of Palestine? What do think he should have done? Welcomed the European Jews?

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

WOW! Everything that the Mandatory did, was done with the knowledge of the Council to the League of Nations.

As I have always contended Britain violated the terms of the Covenant of the United Nations. You lose. Hoisted by your own petard, as they say. LOL

(COMMENT)

When the Ottoman Empire was defeated in World War I, their Asian, Middle East and African possessions, were distributed among the victorious Allied powers under the authority of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations (itself an Allied creation).

The British Mandatory (supervised by the Permanent Mandates Commission), did nothing, relative to the Territory to which the Mandate of Palestine applied, that was not previously agreed upon by the Permanent Mandates Commission Members of the League, or that which was not submitted and explicitly approved by the Council of the League of Nations.

The Covenant is an extension of its membership. Under Article 16(4) "Any Member of the League which has violated any covenant of the League may be declared to be no longer a Member of the League by a vote of the Council concurred in by the Representatives of all the other Members of the League represented thereon."

To my knowledge, there was no instance in which any member charged the British Mandatory with a violation of the Covenant.

To my knowledge, there was no instance in which the Arab Delegation or Arab Higher Committee raised the issue before the Permanent Court of International Justice that the British Mandatory or the Permanent Mandates Commission, violated the Covenant.
​

Remember that the Mandate for Palestine was issued by the League. The League determines to what extent the intent of the Covenant was achieved.

(QUESTION)

How did you derive the alleged violation?

What specifically do you accuse the British Mandatory of violating that was not accomplished in the light of day, and under the supervision of the Permanent Mandates Commission?

Was there any demand by the Covenant that the Palestinians specifically be given independence and sovereignty?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Indeependent]

Ha ha ha. coming from someone who gets hung by his own soiled IslamoNazi underwear. You quote the British when it's convenient, and discount them when it isn't.

The Arabs refused the creation of the Jewish state by the UN, attacked it, and got their butts kicked, and the rest of a history of Arabs getting their butts kicked.

Bottom line Israel is and will be, Palestine never was and never will be.

Now repeat after me: "Inshallah". Ha ha ha.

The Palestinians refused to be colonized by Europeans. I haven't heard of any people that did not resist colonization.

And the Jews refused to be killed by IslamoNazi savages. There were no "Palestinians" back then, just Arab invaders.

From The Armenian Genocide (1914-1924) to the Arab Genocide (1917-today)

1917

Pan-Islamic Vision Comes to Palestine

Amin Al-Husseini returns to Palestine. He brings with him lessons of genocide and the vision of leading a Pan-Islamic empire, where Jews and Christians are not acceptable.

Amin Al-Husseini : Root of Today’s Palestinian Tragedy
1920

The Violence Begins

1920/1921. Riots. Amin Al-Husseini becomes lead figure in organizing riots against locals. Amin Al-Husseini begins life-long campaign of inciting hate between Jews and Muslims under British Mandate of Palestine. He begins rule of terror over local Muslim leaders, who denounce him as an ignorant thug. [iv]

1922

Head of Supreme Muslim Council

Amin Al-Husseini is appointed Head of Supreme Muslim Council (1922-1937)[vi] . He is hugely disappointed by the end of the Ottoman Empire under Ataturk. Husseini becomes fanaticized by the idea that he must restore the lost Islamic Empire. He vows to fight all Muslim seculars.

1922

Jerusalem Capital

Amin Al-Husseini implements restoration of Dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem[vii] . He has the Dome gold-plated for the first time. Thereafter, Jerusalem takes on more importance as Holy Muslim site in the eyes of the Arab World.

1928

Husseini Joins Muslim Brotherhood

Muslim Brotherhood established in Egypt by Hassan El Banna[viii] in 1928. Amin Al-Husseini becomes a central member and ideological inspiration[ix] for the Muslim Brotherhood. Mother organization for today’s Egyptian Islamic Jihad and Hamas[x] . The Muslim Brotherhood preaches Wahhabi Islam[xi] , which justifies violent means to rid the ‘Muslim world’ of its non-Islamic element. It envisions a Pan-Islamic Empire, where strict Islamic law rules over all.

1929
Hebron Massacre

Amin Al-Husseini organizes more riots in Palestine. He spreads false rumors to further turn the local Muslims against the Jews. Random murdering of Hebron Jews begins. Hebron Jewish community was over 2,000 years old.

The rumors were apparently not false. The European Jews intended to evict and/or murder the Christians and Muslims of Palestine.

No false rumors, today's Palestinians are the bastard children of the marriage between Nazism, and Arab Islamic nationalism. You cannot change history.

HUSSEINI : “Murder The Jews! Murder Them All!”
1946

Yasser Arafat’s Teacher and Uncle:

Amin Al-Husseini

Egyptian-born Yasser Arafat[xlii] meets Amin Al-Husseini at age 17 and starts to work for him. Amin Al-Husseini allegedly great-uncle of Arafat, whose real name is Mohammed Abder Rauf Arafat Al-Kudwa Al-Husseini. Arafat reportedly changed his name intentionally to disguise his connection to Amin al-Husseini.

Arafat

Holy Struggler

Amin Al-Husseini places Yasser Arafat in charge of arms procurement and shipment for the Mufti’s Irregular Forces: “The Holy Strugglers”

1948-1949

Husseini:

“I declare a Holy War!”

Amin Al Husseini
with Abdel Nasser: President of Egypt.
With UN recognition, Israel declares statehood. Arab League immediately declares Jihad (Holy War) against Israel. Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Jordan immediately declare war on the new Jewish state and invade Israel.

Amin Al-Husseini[xliii] : “I declare a Holy War, My Muslim Brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all!”

Muslim Nazi Troops of Amin Al Husseini. Holy War. 1943.

Arafat Speaks On Amin Al-Husseini

“I was one of his troops.”

Yasser Arafat was interviewed by Al Sharq Al Awsat (London Arabic Daily) and reprinted in Palestinian daily Al Quds on August 2, 2002:

“We are not Afghanistan… We are the mighty people. Were they able to replace our hero Hajj Amin Al-Husseini?… There were a number of attempts to get rid of Hajj Amin, when they considered him an ally of the Nazis. But even so, he lived in Cairo, and participated in the 1948 War and I was one of his troops.”

Is there any reason why Arafat should not have resisted European Jew colonization of Palestine? What do think he should have done? Welcomed the European Jews?

Arabs attacked, get a$$es kicked, Monty cries.

 

[montelatici]

The Palestinians refused to be colonized by Europeans. I haven't heard of any people that did not resist colonization.

And the Jews refused to be killed by IslamoNazi savages. There were no "Palestinians" back then, just Arab invaders.

From The Armenian Genocide (1914-1924) to the Arab Genocide (1917-today)

1917

Pan-Islamic Vision Comes to Palestine

Amin Al-Husseini returns to Palestine. He brings with him lessons of genocide and the vision of leading a Pan-Islamic empire, where Jews and Christians are not acceptable.

Amin Al-Husseini : Root of Today’s Palestinian Tragedy
1920

The Violence Begins

1920/1921. Riots. Amin Al-Husseini becomes lead figure in organizing riots against locals. Amin Al-Husseini begins life-long campaign of inciting hate between Jews and Muslims under British Mandate of Palestine. He begins rule of terror over local Muslim leaders, who denounce him as an ignorant thug. [iv]

1922

Head of Supreme Muslim Council

Amin Al-Husseini is appointed Head of Supreme Muslim Council (1922-1937)[vi] . He is hugely disappointed by the end of the Ottoman Empire under Ataturk. Husseini becomes fanaticized by the idea that he must restore the lost Islamic Empire. He vows to fight all Muslim seculars.

1922

Jerusalem Capital

Amin Al-Husseini implements restoration of Dome of the Rock and Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem[vii] . He has the Dome gold-plated for the first time. Thereafter, Jerusalem takes on more importance as Holy Muslim site in the eyes of the Arab World.

1928

Husseini Joins Muslim Brotherhood

Muslim Brotherhood established in Egypt by Hassan El Banna[viii] in 1928. Amin Al-Husseini becomes a central member and ideological inspiration[ix] for the Muslim Brotherhood. Mother organization for today’s Egyptian Islamic Jihad and Hamas[x] . The Muslim Brotherhood preaches Wahhabi Islam[xi] , which justifies violent means to rid the ‘Muslim world’ of its non-Islamic element. It envisions a Pan-Islamic Empire, where strict Islamic law rules over all.

1929
Hebron Massacre

Amin Al-Husseini organizes more riots in Palestine. He spreads false rumors to further turn the local Muslims against the Jews. Random murdering of Hebron Jews begins. Hebron Jewish community was over 2,000 years old.

The rumors were apparently not false. The European Jews intended to evict and/or murder the Christians and Muslims of Palestine.

No false rumors, today's Palestinians are the bastard children of the marriage between Nazism, and Arab Islamic nationalism. You cannot change history.

HUSSEINI : “Murder The Jews! Murder Them All!”
1946

Yasser Arafat’s Teacher and Uncle:

Amin Al-Husseini

Egyptian-born Yasser Arafat[xlii] meets Amin Al-Husseini at age 17 and starts to work for him. Amin Al-Husseini allegedly great-uncle of Arafat, whose real name is Mohammed Abder Rauf Arafat Al-Kudwa Al-Husseini. Arafat reportedly changed his name intentionally to disguise his connection to Amin al-Husseini.

Arafat

Holy Struggler

Amin Al-Husseini places Yasser Arafat in charge of arms procurement and shipment for the Mufti’s Irregular Forces: “The Holy Strugglers”

1948-1949

Husseini:

“I declare a Holy War!”

Amin Al Husseini
with Abdel Nasser: President of Egypt.
With UN recognition, Israel declares statehood. Arab League immediately declares Jihad (Holy War) against Israel. Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Jordan immediately declare war on the new Jewish state and invade Israel.

Amin Al-Husseini[xliii] : “I declare a Holy War, My Muslim Brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all!”

Muslim Nazi Troops of Amin Al Husseini. Holy War. 1943.

Arafat Speaks On Amin Al-Husseini

“I was one of his troops.”

Yasser Arafat was interviewed by Al Sharq Al Awsat (London Arabic Daily) and reprinted in Palestinian daily Al Quds on August 2, 2002:

“We are not Afghanistan… We are the mighty people. Were they able to replace our hero Hajj Amin Al-Husseini?… There were a number of attempts to get rid of Hajj Amin, when they considered him an ally of the Nazis. But even so, he lived in Cairo, and participated in the 1948 War and I was one of his troops.”

Is there any reason why Arafat should not have resisted European Jew colonization of Palestine? What do think he should have done? Welcomed the European Jews?

Arabs attacked, get a$$es kicked, Monty cries.

It was the Jews that started murdering and evicting the Christians and Muslims, as confirmed by recently declassified British intelligence documents. The British determined that the Arab armies were the Palestinians only hope for survival.

"Declassified UK reports document build-up of conflict, Jewish public's endorsement of their leaders' pro-terrorist stance and declare armies of Arab states were Palestinians' 'only hope'

As early as October 1946, two years before partition, UK officials warned London that Jewish opinion would oppose partition "unless the Jewish share were so enlarged as to make the scheme wholly unacceptable to Arabs".

After an increase in violent attacks by the militant Zionists of the Stern group and Irgun, British officials reported later in 1946: "Arab leaders appear to be still disposed to defer active opposition so long as a chance of a political decision acceptable to Arab interests exists." But they warned: "There is a real danger lest any further Jewish provocation may result in isolated acts of retaliation spreading inevitably to wider Arab-Jewish clashes"

British officials predicted war – and Arab defeat – in Palestine in 1948

 

[flacaltenn]

I'm thinking the revisionists would like to engage in all kinds of antisemitic lingo disguised as anti zionistic relying on the general publics ignorance of what exactly zionism is

Quote
Until 1948, the primary goals of Zionism were the re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel ("Eretz Israel" in Hebrew), ingathering of the exiles, and liberation of Jews from the antisemitic discrimination and persecution that occurred in their diaspora. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism continues primarily to advocate on behalf of Israel and address threats to its continued existence and security.

A religious variety of Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity defined as adherence to religious Judaism, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies, and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority nation in their own state.[1] A variety of Zionism, called cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am, fostered a secular vision of a Jewish "spiritual center" in Israel. Unlike Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, Ahad Ha'am strived for Israel to be "a Jewish state and not merely a state of Jews".[8]

Advocates of Zionism view it as a national liberation movement for the repatriation of a persecuted people residing as minorities in a variety of nations, to the homeland to which they had a historical connection.
End quote

That was from WIKI

The simple reality is that zionism is simply the support of the state of Israel and the belief that it is exactly where it should be, Israel today is in the exact same spot as Judea was in ancient times. ;--)

You would be surprised what Ahad Ha'am actually wrote:


"Thus, in the spring of 1891, writing from Jerusalem, Ahad Ha'am was the first Zionist intellectual to raise the question of the Arabs. There were 3,000 Jews then in the farming settlements of Palestine and perhaps 10,000 more in the cities, among half a million Arabs. And yet, Ahad Ha'am predicted that conflict between Jews and Arabs was probable and perhaps inevitable. The Arabs, he insisted, were not "wild men of the desert" who would remain inert and uncomprehending while the Zionists built their community. "If in the course of time," he wrote, "the Jewish holding in the country should develop significantly and encroach in some degree on the Arabs, they will not easily give up their position." The clear meaning of this warning was that Palestine was not, as some early slogans proclaimed, "a land without a people" waiting for a "people without a land." All his life he kept insisting that both prudence and justice commanded the Zionists to make peace with the Arabs.

100 Years Later, a Jewish Writer's Time Has Come

Bull.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3


163. The Arabs of Palestine consider themselves as having a "natural" right to that country, although they have not been in possession of it as a sovereign nation.


166. The desire of the Arab people of Palestine to safeguard their national existence is a very natural desire. However, Palestinian nationalism, as distinct from Arab nationalism, is itself a relatively new phenomenon, which appeared only after the division of the "Arab rectangle" by the settlement of the First World War.

What does that nonsense have to do with Ahad Ha'am's statement? Do you even know who he is?

From your reference :

"148. When the Mandate was approved, all concerned were aware of the existence of an overwhelming Arab majority in Palestine. More over, the King-Crane Report, among others, had warned that the Zionist program could not be carried out except by force of arms. It would seem clear, therefore, that the provisions of the Mandate relating to the Jewish National Home could be based only on the assumption that sooner or later the Arab fears would gradually be overcome and that Arab hostility to the terms of the Mandate would in time weaken and disappear.

149. This seems to have been the basic assumption, but it proved to be a false one, since the history of the last twenty-five years has established the fact that not only the creation of a Jewish State but even the continuation of the building of the Jewish National Home by restricted immigration could be implemented only by the use of some considerable force. It cannot be properly contended that the use of force as a means of establishing the National Home was either intended by the Mandate or implied by its provisions. On the contrary, the provisions of the Mandate should preclude any systematic use of force for the purpose of its application. In its preamble, the Mandate states that the Principal Allied Powers agreed to entrust Palestine to a mandatory Power for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.147/ The guiding principle of that Article was the well-being of peoples not yet able to stand by themselves."

150. It has been suggested that the well-being of the indigenous population of Palestine might be ensured by the unfettered development of the Jewish National Home, "Well-being" in a practical sense, however, must be something more than a mere objective conception; and the Arabs, thinking subjectively, have demonstrated by their acts their belief that the conversion of Palestine into a Jewish State against their will would be very much opposed to their conception of what is essential to their well-being. To contend, therefore, that there is an international obligation to the effect that Jewish immigration should continue with a view to establishing a Jewish majority in the whole of Palestine, would mean ignoring the wishes of the Arab population and their views as to their own well-being. This would involve an apparent violation of what was the governing principle of Article 22 of the Covenant.



As I have always contended Britain violated the terms of the Covenant of the United Nations. You lose. Hoisted by your own petard, as they say. LOL

No petard hoisting here -- 'xcept yours. As you know -- the Mandate carried out those concerns by excluding the MAJORITY of Palestine to any part of the Jewish state. No violation -- apparent or otherwise..

Apparently you are not interested in the nuances of Zionist hating vs Jew Hating as you have an issue with the establishment of a Jewish Homeland in any shape or form. All of the other "British Imperialism" excersized at that time seems to be just fine with you...

Days of Zionism are long over. And you need to get over the fact that they were successful in their efforts and worry MORE about the OTHER MAJORITY land that NO Palestinians ever claimed or developed or organized into a nation..

 

[montelatici]

I'm thinking the revisionists would like to engage in all kinds of antisemitic lingo disguised as anti zionistic relying on the general publics ignorance of what exactly zionism is

Quote
Until 1948, the primary goals of Zionism were the re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel ("Eretz Israel" in Hebrew), ingathering of the exiles, and liberation of Jews from the antisemitic discrimination and persecution that occurred in their diaspora. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism continues primarily to advocate on behalf of Israel and address threats to its continued existence and security.

A religious variety of Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity defined as adherence to religious Judaism, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies, and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority nation in their own state.[1] A variety of Zionism, called cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am, fostered a secular vision of a Jewish "spiritual center" in Israel. Unlike Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, Ahad Ha'am strived for Israel to be "a Jewish state and not merely a state of Jews".[8]

Advocates of Zionism view it as a national liberation movement for the repatriation of a persecuted people residing as minorities in a variety of nations, to the homeland to which they had a historical connection.
End quote

That was from WIKI

The simple reality is that zionism is simply the support of the state of Israel and the belief that it is exactly where it should be, Israel today is in the exact same spot as Judea was in ancient times. ;--)

You would be surprised what Ahad Ha'am actually wrote:


"Thus, in the spring of 1891, writing from Jerusalem, Ahad Ha'am was the first Zionist intellectual to raise the question of the Arabs. There were 3,000 Jews then in the farming settlements of Palestine and perhaps 10,000 more in the cities, among half a million Arabs. And yet, Ahad Ha'am predicted that conflict between Jews and Arabs was probable and perhaps inevitable. The Arabs, he insisted, were not "wild men of the desert" who would remain inert and uncomprehending while the Zionists built their community. "If in the course of time," he wrote, "the Jewish holding in the country should develop significantly and encroach in some degree on the Arabs, they will not easily give up their position." The clear meaning of this warning was that Palestine was not, as some early slogans proclaimed, "a land without a people" waiting for a "people without a land." All his life he kept insisting that both prudence and justice commanded the Zionists to make peace with the Arabs.

100 Years Later, a Jewish Writer's Time Has Come

Bull.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3


163. The Arabs of Palestine consider themselves as having a "natural" right to that country, although they have not been in possession of it as a sovereign nation.


166. The desire of the Arab people of Palestine to safeguard their national existence is a very natural desire. However, Palestinian nationalism, as distinct from Arab nationalism, is itself a relatively new phenomenon, which appeared only after the division of the "Arab rectangle" by the settlement of the First World War.

What does that nonsense have to do with Ahad Ha'am's statement? Do you even know who he is?

From your reference :

"148. When the Mandate was approved, all concerned were aware of the existence of an overwhelming Arab majority in Palestine. More over, the King-Crane Report, among others, had warned that the Zionist program could not be carried out except by force of arms. It would seem clear, therefore, that the provisions of the Mandate relating to the Jewish National Home could be based only on the assumption that sooner or later the Arab fears would gradually be overcome and that Arab hostility to the terms of the Mandate would in time weaken and disappear.

149. This seems to have been the basic assumption, but it proved to be a false one, since the history of the last twenty-five years has established the fact that not only the creation of a Jewish State but even the continuation of the building of the Jewish National Home by restricted immigration could be implemented only by the use of some considerable force. It cannot be properly contended that the use of force as a means of establishing the National Home was either intended by the Mandate or implied by its provisions. On the contrary, the provisions of the Mandate should preclude any systematic use of force for the purpose of its application. In its preamble, the Mandate states that the Principal Allied Powers agreed to entrust Palestine to a mandatory Power for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.147/ The guiding principle of that Article was the well-being of peoples not yet able to stand by themselves."

150. It has been suggested that the well-being of the indigenous population of Palestine might be ensured by the unfettered development of the Jewish National Home, "Well-being" in a practical sense, however, must be something more than a mere objective conception; and the Arabs, thinking subjectively, have demonstrated by their acts their belief that the conversion of Palestine into a Jewish State against their will would be very much opposed to their conception of what is essential to their well-being. To contend, therefore, that there is an international obligation to the effect that Jewish immigration should continue with a view to establishing a Jewish majority in the whole of Palestine, would mean ignoring the wishes of the Arab population and their views as to their own well-being. This would involve an apparent violation of what was the governing principle of Article 22 of the Covenant.



As I have always contended Britain violated the terms of the Covenant of the United Nations. You lose. Hoisted by your own petard, as they say. LOL

No petard hoisting here -- 'xcept yours. As you know -- the Mandate carried out those concerns by excluding the MAJORITY of Palestine to any part of the Jewish state. No violation -- apparent or otherwise..

Well, you win first prize in cognitive dissonance, or have other comprehension challenges. You certainly do not do your side any favors, but then you folks are trying to defend the indefensible.
As they say, it's better for you to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. Y

 

[Roudy]

montelatici, et al,

WOW! Everything that the Mandatory did, was done with the knowledge of the Council to the League of Nations.

As I have always contended Britain violated the terms of the Covenant of the United Nations. You lose. Hoisted by your own petard, as they say. LOL

(COMMENT)

When the Ottoman Empire was defeated in World War I, their Asian, Middle East and African possessions, were distributed among the victorious Allied powers under the authority of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations (itself an Allied creation).

The British Mandatory (supervised by the Permanent Mandates Commission), did nothing, relative to the Territory to which the Mandate of Palestine applied, that was not previously agreed upon by the Permanent Mandates Commission Members of the League, or that which was not submitted and explicitly approved by the Council of the League of Nations.

The Covenant is an extension of its membership. Under Article 16(4) "Any Member of the League which has violated any covenant of the League may be declared to be no longer a Member of the League by a vote of the Council concurred in by the Representatives of all the other Members of the League represented thereon."

To my knowledge, there was no instance in which any member charged the British Mandatory with a violation of the Covenant.

To my knowledge, there was no instance in which the Arab Delegation or Arab Higher Committee raised the issue before the Permanent Court of International Justice that the British Mandatory or the Permanent Mandates Commission, violated the Covenant.
​

Remember that the Mandate for Palestine was issued by the League. The League determines to what extent the intent of the Covenant was achieved.

(QUESTION)

How did you derive the alleged violation?

What specifically do you accuse the British Mandatory of violating that was not accomplished in the light of day, and under the supervision of the Permanent Mandates Commission?

Was there any demand by the Covenant that the Palestinians specifically be given independence and sovereignty?

Most Respectfully,
R

As usual Monte makes up Shiite as he goes along. And everytime he does it, it hits the fan.