Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It's amazing how the Israelis bitch about the 2-3 dead civilian Jews killed in Palestinian freedom-fighting actions after Israelis murder thousands of Palestinian women and children. It's called the Zionist Jew mentality.
Hey, Monte, I noticed you didn't post your criteria for when it is morally and legally correct to attack civilian non-combatants. Here it sounds very much like you think its okay to attack civilian Jews.
1. A soldier or an armed person is a combatant.
2. It is not correct or legal to attack unarmed civilian non-combatants.
It's amazing how the Israelis bitch about the 2-3 dead civilian Jews killed in Palestinian freedom-fighting actions after Israelis murder thousands of Palestinian women and children. It's called the Zionist Jew mentality.
Hey, Monte, I noticed you didn't post your criteria for when it is morally and legally correct to attack civilian non-combatants. Here it sounds very much like you think its okay to attack civilian Jews.
1. A soldier or an armed person is a combatant.
2. It is not correct or legal to attack unarmed civilian non-combatants.
Do you agree with fanger that a solider remains a soldier even when not actively engaging in combat?
Would you agree that this type of terror attack is not "resistance" or "freedom-fighting" but an illegal and immoral act against non-combatants?
A soldier remains a soldier. The French Resistance did not hesitate to attack German soldiers whether in uniform or out of uniform or on leave. The French Resistance were only labeled terrorists by the Germans.
I discovered a long ago that the IJH'ing cabal that trolls these threads cares not a wit for the Pal'istanians and views them only as a disposable commodity to be used as a flail against Israelis. They will gladly offer-up the deaths of Pal'istanians if it means they can satiate their perverse Jooooooooo hatreds with the Pal'istanians as sacrificial lambs.A soldier remains a soldier. The French Resistance did not hesitate to attack German soldiers whether in uniform or out of uniform or on leave. The French Resistance were only labeled terrorists by the Germans.
Okay. Same questions I asked fanger for you then.
As I said before all German troops involved in war crimes are held responsable even if they are 85 years old the same standard should be used for Israeli´s who commit war crimes, such as those who shoot civilians holding a white flag
It's amazing how the Israelis bitch about the 2-3 dead civilian Jews killed in Palestinian freedom-fighting actions after Israelis murder thousands of Palestinian women and children. It's called the Zionist Jew mentality.
Hey, Monte, I noticed you didn't post your criteria for when it is morally and legally correct to attack civilian non-combatants. Here it sounds very much like you think its okay to attack civilian Jews.
1. A soldier or an armed person is a combatant.
2. It is not correct or legal to attack unarmed civilian non-combatants.
Do you agree with fanger that a solider remains a soldier even when not actively engaging in combat?
Would you agree that this type of terror attack is not "resistance" or "freedom-fighting" but an illegal and immoral act against non-combatants?
It's amazing how the Israelis bitch about the 2-3 dead civilian Jews killed in Palestinian freedom-fighting actions after Israelis murder thousands of Palestinian women and children. It's called the Zionist Jew mentality.
Hey, Monte, I noticed you didn't post your criteria for when it is morally and legally correct to attack civilian non-combatants. Here it sounds very much like you think its okay to attack civilian Jews.
1. A soldier or an armed person is a combatant.
2. It is not correct or legal to attack unarmed civilian non-combatants.
Do you agree with fanger that a solider remains a soldier even when not actively engaging in combat?
Would you agree that this type of terror attack is not "resistance" or "freedom-fighting" but an illegal and immoral act against non-combatants?
These are the definitions according to the Geneva Conventions.
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
COMBATANTS AND PRISONERS OF WAR
Article 44 -- Combatants and prisoners of war
1. Any combatant, as defined in Article 43 (see below) , who falls into the power of an adverse Party shall be a prisoner of war.
ICRC service
ARMED FORCES
ICRC service
Article 43 [ Link ] -- Armed forces
1. The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse Party. Such armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which, ' inter alia ', shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.
2. Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict (other than medical personnel and chaplains covered by Article 33 [ Link ] of the Third Convention) are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.
3. Whenever a Party to a conflict incorporates a paramilitary or armed law enforcement agency into its armed forces it shall so notify the other Parties to the conflict."
It's amazing how the Israelis bitch about the 2-3 dead civilian Jews killed in Palestinian freedom-fighting actions after Israelis murder thousands of Palestinian women and children. It's called the Zionist Jew mentality.
Hey, Monte, I noticed you didn't post your criteria for when it is morally and legally correct to attack civilian non-combatants. Here it sounds very much like you think its okay to attack civilian Jews.
1. A soldier or an armed person is a combatant.
2. It is not correct or legal to attack unarmed civilian non-combatants.
Do you agree with fanger that a solider remains a soldier even when not actively engaging in combat?
Would you agree that this type of terror attack is not "resistance" or "freedom-fighting" but an illegal and immoral act against non-combatants?
These are the definitions according to the Geneva Conventions.
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
COMBATANTS AND PRISONERS OF WAR
Article 44 -- Combatants and prisoners of war
1. Any combatant, as defined in Article 43 (see below) , who falls into the power of an adverse Party shall be a prisoner of war.
ICRC service
ARMED FORCES
ICRC service
Article 43 [ Link ] -- Armed forces
1. The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse Party. Such armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which, ' inter alia ', shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.
2. Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict (other than medical personnel and chaplains covered by Article 33 [ Link ] of the Third Convention) are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.
3. Whenever a Party to a conflict incorporates a paramilitary or armed law enforcement agency into its armed forces it shall so notify the other Parties to the conflict."
So then.... Item 1 could be construed to incorporate Pal'istanians who are a group under the command of of an Islamic terrorist organization and have thus become combatants.
Let's stop whining then about those Pali casualties.
Hey, Monte, I noticed you didn't post your criteria for when it is morally and legally correct to attack civilian non-combatants. Here it sounds very much like you think its okay to attack civilian Jews.
1. A soldier or an armed person is a combatant.
2. It is not correct or legal to attack unarmed civilian non-combatants.
Do you agree with fanger that a solider remains a soldier even when not actively engaging in combat?
Would you agree that this type of terror attack is not "resistance" or "freedom-fighting" but an illegal and immoral act against non-combatants?
These are the definitions according to the Geneva Conventions.
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
COMBATANTS AND PRISONERS OF WAR
Article 44 -- Combatants and prisoners of war
1. Any combatant, as defined in Article 43 (see below) , who falls into the power of an adverse Party shall be a prisoner of war.
ICRC service
ARMED FORCES
ICRC service
Article 43 [ Link ] -- Armed forces
1. The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse Party. Such armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which, ' inter alia ', shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.
2. Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict (other than medical personnel and chaplains covered by Article 33 [ Link ] of the Third Convention) are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.
3. Whenever a Party to a conflict incorporates a paramilitary or armed law enforcement agency into its armed forces it shall so notify the other Parties to the conflict."
So then.... Item 1 could be construed to incorporate Pal'istanians who are a group under the command of of an Islamic terrorist organization and have thus become combatants.
Let's stop whining then about those Pali casualties.
Palestinians just don't get it. If you don't want a bunch of dead Palestinains by Israel, then don't attack any Israeli's.
Pali's don't get it.............when they attack...........1. A soldier or an armed person is a combatant.
2. It is not correct or legal to attack unarmed civilian non-combatants.
Do you agree with fanger that a solider remains a soldier even when not actively engaging in combat?
Would you agree that this type of terror attack is not "resistance" or "freedom-fighting" but an illegal and immoral act against non-combatants?
These are the definitions according to the Geneva Conventions.
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
COMBATANTS AND PRISONERS OF WAR
Article 44 -- Combatants and prisoners of war
1. Any combatant, as defined in Article 43 (see below) , who falls into the power of an adverse Party shall be a prisoner of war.
ICRC service
ARMED FORCES
ICRC service
Article 43 [ Link ] -- Armed forces
1. The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse Party. Such armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which, ' inter alia ', shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.
2. Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict (other than medical personnel and chaplains covered by Article 33 [ Link ] of the Third Convention) are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.
3. Whenever a Party to a conflict incorporates a paramilitary or armed law enforcement agency into its armed forces it shall so notify the other Parties to the conflict."
So then.... Item 1 could be construed to incorporate Pal'istanians who are a group under the command of of an Islamic terrorist organization and have thus become combatants.
Let's stop whining then about those Pali casualties.
Palestinians just don't get it. If you don't want a bunch of dead Palestinains by Israel, then don't attack any Israeli's.
Israelis just don't get, if you don't want resistance to colonial rule/occupation. End the occupation.
The problem faced by the profoundly ignorant is that "occupation" is not the driving force that results in the piles of dead Pal'istanian Islamic terrorists.1. A soldier or an armed person is a combatant.
2. It is not correct or legal to attack unarmed civilian non-combatants.
Do you agree with fanger that a solider remains a soldier even when not actively engaging in combat?
Would you agree that this type of terror attack is not "resistance" or "freedom-fighting" but an illegal and immoral act against non-combatants?
These are the definitions according to the Geneva Conventions.
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
COMBATANTS AND PRISONERS OF WAR
Article 44 -- Combatants and prisoners of war
1. Any combatant, as defined in Article 43 (see below) , who falls into the power of an adverse Party shall be a prisoner of war.
ICRC service
ARMED FORCES
ICRC service
Article 43 [ Link ] -- Armed forces
1. The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse Party. Such armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which, ' inter alia ', shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.
2. Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict (other than medical personnel and chaplains covered by Article 33 [ Link ] of the Third Convention) are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.
3. Whenever a Party to a conflict incorporates a paramilitary or armed law enforcement agency into its armed forces it shall so notify the other Parties to the conflict."
So then.... Item 1 could be construed to incorporate Pal'istanians who are a group under the command of of an Islamic terrorist organization and have thus become combatants.
Let's stop whining then about those Pali casualties.
Palestinians just don't get it. If you don't want a bunch of dead Palestinains by Israel, then don't attack any Israeli's.
Israelis just don't get, if you don't want resistance to colonial rule/occupation. End the occupation.
The problem faced by the profoundly ignorant is that "occupation" is not the driving force that results in the piles of dead Pal'istanian Islamic terrorists.Do you agree with fanger that a solider remains a soldier even when not actively engaging in combat?
Would you agree that this type of terror attack is not "resistance" or "freedom-fighting" but an illegal and immoral act against non-combatants?
These are the definitions according to the Geneva Conventions.
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
COMBATANTS AND PRISONERS OF WAR
Article 44 -- Combatants and prisoners of war
1. Any combatant, as defined in Article 43 (see below) , who falls into the power of an adverse Party shall be a prisoner of war.
ICRC service
ARMED FORCES
ICRC service
Article 43 [ Link ] -- Armed forces
1. The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse Party. Such armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which, ' inter alia ', shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.
2. Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict (other than medical personnel and chaplains covered by Article 33 [ Link ] of the Third Convention) are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.
3. Whenever a Party to a conflict incorporates a paramilitary or armed law enforcement agency into its armed forces it shall so notify the other Parties to the conflict."
So then.... Item 1 could be construed to incorporate Pal'istanians who are a group under the command of of an Islamic terrorist organization and have thus become combatants.
Let's stop whining then about those Pali casualties.
Palestinians just don't get it. If you don't want a bunch of dead Palestinains by Israel, then don't attack any Israeli's.
Israelis just don't get, if you don't want resistance to colonial rule/occupation. End the occupation.
Islamist ideology as defined in the Hamas Charter is that driving force. It is a fascistic politico-religious ideology that has never undergone reform or enlightenment.
The problem faced by the profoundly ignorant is that "occupation" is not the driving force that results in the piles of dead Pal'istanian Islamic terrorists.These are the definitions according to the Geneva Conventions.
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
COMBATANTS AND PRISONERS OF WAR
Article 44 -- Combatants and prisoners of war
1. Any combatant, as defined in Article 43 (see below) , who falls into the power of an adverse Party shall be a prisoner of war.
ICRC service
ARMED FORCES
ICRC service
Article 43 [ Link ] -- Armed forces
1. The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse Party. Such armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which, ' inter alia ', shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.
2. Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict (other than medical personnel and chaplains covered by Article 33 [ Link ] of the Third Convention) are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.
3. Whenever a Party to a conflict incorporates a paramilitary or armed law enforcement agency into its armed forces it shall so notify the other Parties to the conflict."
So then.... Item 1 could be construed to incorporate Pal'istanians who are a group under the command of of an Islamic terrorist organization and have thus become combatants.
Let's stop whining then about those Pali casualties.
Palestinians just don't get it. If you don't want a bunch of dead Palestinains by Israel, then don't attack any Israeli's.
Israelis just don't get, if you don't want resistance to colonial rule/occupation. End the occupation.
Islamist ideology as defined in the Hamas Charter is that driving force. It is a fascistic politico-religious ideology that has never undergone reform or enlightenment.
There would not have been any "occupation" had the Arab countries not joined together to annihilate Israel while making the Palestinians refugees in the conflict.
The problem faced by the profoundly ignorant is that "occupation" is not the driving force that results in the piles of dead Pal'istanian Islamic terrorists.So then.... Item 1 could be construed to incorporate Pal'istanians who are a group under the command of of an Islamic terrorist organization and have thus become combatants.
Let's stop whining then about those Pali casualties.
Palestinians just don't get it. If you don't want a bunch of dead Palestinains by Israel, then don't attack any Israeli's.
Israelis just don't get, if you don't want resistance to colonial rule/occupation. End the occupation.
Islamist ideology as defined in the Hamas Charter is that driving force. It is a fascistic politico-religious ideology that has never undergone reform or enlightenment.
There would not have been any "occupation" had the Arab countries not joined together to annihilate Israel while making the Palestinians refugees in the conflict.
As the British de-classified intelligence documents have confirmed. The European/Zionist invading Jews attacked the native people to kill or evict them and the Arab neighbors intervened to prevent the Jews from committing the war crimes of ethnic cleansing and genocide.
"
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'
"The documents, which have a remarkable contemporary resonance, reveal how British officials looked on as Jewish settlers took over more and more Arab land."
"In the weeks leading up to the partition of Palestine in 1948, when Britain gave up its UN mandate, Jewish terrorist groups were mounting increasing attacks..................."
After an increase in violent attacks by the militant Zionists of the Stern group and Irgun, [FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]British officials reported later in 1946: [/FONT]"Arab leaders appear to be still disposed to defer active opposition s[FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]o long as a chance of a political decision acceptable to Arab interests exists." [/FONT]
[FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]British officials predicted war – and Arab defeat – in Palestine in 1948
As can be seen by the facts as reported by British intelligence, all of the crap you Zionist fanatics have been fed was bullshit. The Jews were the land grabbing, murderous terrorists and the Arabs deferred active opposition to the murderous Jewish invaders in the hope of a peaceful solution. The Arab neighbors, as a last resort intervened in an attempt to save the Christians and Muslims, as reported by the British.[/FONT]
The problem faced by the profoundly ignorant is that "occupation" is not the driving force that results in the piles of dead Pal'istanian Islamic terrorists.Palestinians just don't get it. If you don't want a bunch of dead Palestinains by Israel, then don't attack any Israeli's.
Israelis just don't get, if you don't want resistance to colonial rule/occupation. End the occupation.
Islamist ideology as defined in the Hamas Charter is that driving force. It is a fascistic politico-religious ideology that has never undergone reform or enlightenment.
There would not have been any "occupation" had the Arab countries not joined together to annihilate Israel while making the Palestinians refugees in the conflict.
As the British de-classified intelligence documents have confirmed. The European/Zionist invading Jews attacked the native people to kill or evict them and the Arab neighbors intervened to prevent the Jews from committing the war crimes of ethnic cleansing and genocide.
"
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'
"The documents, which have a remarkable contemporary resonance, reveal how British officials looked on as Jewish settlers took over more and more Arab land."
"In the weeks leading up to the partition of Palestine in 1948, when Britain gave up its UN mandate, Jewish terrorist groups were mounting increasing attacks..................."
After an increase in violent attacks by the militant Zionists of the Stern group and Irgun, [FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]British officials reported later in 1946: [/FONT]"Arab leaders appear to be still disposed to defer active opposition s[FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]o long as a chance of a political decision acceptable to Arab interests exists." [/FONT]
[FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]British officials predicted war – and Arab defeat – in Palestine in 1948
As can be seen by the facts as reported by British intelligence, all of the crap you Zionist fanatics have been fed was bullshit. The Jews were the land grabbing, murderous terrorists and the Arabs deferred active opposition to the murderous Jewish invaders in the hope of a peaceful solution. The Arab neighbors, as a last resort intervened in an attempt to save the Christians and Muslims, as reported by the British.[/FONT]
And the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians is still going on. In 1948 there were approximately 1.2 million Palestinians living in Israel. And now there are only just under 6 million of them left. It's a GENOCIDE I tell ya, a GENOCIDE!
Population Statistics - Israeli-Palestinian Conflict - ProCon.org
Armenia.........perhaps?The problem faced by the profoundly ignorant is that "occupation" is not the driving force that results in the piles of dead Pal'istanian Islamic terrorists.Israelis just don't get, if you don't want resistance to colonial rule/occupation. End the occupation.
Islamist ideology as defined in the Hamas Charter is that driving force. It is a fascistic politico-religious ideology that has never undergone reform or enlightenment.
There would not have been any "occupation" had the Arab countries not joined together to annihilate Israel while making the Palestinians refugees in the conflict.
As the British de-classified intelligence documents have confirmed. The European/Zionist invading Jews attacked the native people to kill or evict them and the Arab neighbors intervened to prevent the Jews from committing the war crimes of ethnic cleansing and genocide.
"
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'
"The documents, which have a remarkable contemporary resonance, reveal how British officials looked on as Jewish settlers took over more and more Arab land."
"In the weeks leading up to the partition of Palestine in 1948, when Britain gave up its UN mandate, Jewish terrorist groups were mounting increasing attacks..................."
After an increase in violent attacks by the militant Zionists of the Stern group and Irgun, [FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]British officials reported later in 1946: [/FONT]"Arab leaders appear to be still disposed to defer active opposition s[FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]o long as a chance of a political decision acceptable to Arab interests exists." [/FONT]
[FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]British officials predicted war – and Arab defeat – in Palestine in 1948
As can be seen by the facts as reported by British intelligence, all of the crap you Zionist fanatics have been fed was bullshit. The Jews were the land grabbing, murderous terrorists and the Arabs deferred active opposition to the murderous Jewish invaders in the hope of a peaceful solution. The Arab neighbors, as a last resort intervened in an attempt to save the Christians and Muslims, as reported by the British.[/FONT]
And the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians is still going on. In 1948 there were approximately 1.2 million Palestinians living in Israel. And now there are only just under 6 million of them left. It's a GENOCIDE I tell ya, a GENOCIDE!
Population Statistics - Israeli-Palestinian Conflict - ProCon.org
You have always demonstrated that you haven't a clue as to the definition of genocide. Look it up for once in your life.
Armenia.........perhaps?The problem faced by the profoundly ignorant is that "occupation" is not the driving force that results in the piles of dead Pal'istanian Islamic terrorists.
Islamist ideology as defined in the Hamas Charter is that driving force. It is a fascistic politico-religious ideology that has never undergone reform or enlightenment.
There would not have been any "occupation" had the Arab countries not joined together to annihilate Israel while making the Palestinians refugees in the conflict.
As the British de-classified intelligence documents have confirmed. The European/Zionist invading Jews attacked the native people to kill or evict them and the Arab neighbors intervened to prevent the Jews from committing the war crimes of ethnic cleansing and genocide.
"
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'
"The documents, which have a remarkable contemporary resonance, reveal how British officials looked on as Jewish settlers took over more and more Arab land."
"In the weeks leading up to the partition of Palestine in 1948, when Britain gave up its UN mandate, Jewish terrorist groups were mounting increasing attacks..................."
After an increase in violent attacks by the militant Zionists of the Stern group and Irgun, [FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]British officials reported later in 1946: [/FONT]"Arab leaders appear to be still disposed to defer active opposition s[FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]o long as a chance of a political decision acceptable to Arab interests exists." [/FONT]
[FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]British officials predicted war – and Arab defeat – in Palestine in 1948
As can be seen by the facts as reported by British intelligence, all of the crap you Zionist fanatics have been fed was bullshit. The Jews were the land grabbing, murderous terrorists and the Arabs deferred active opposition to the murderous Jewish invaders in the hope of a peaceful solution. The Arab neighbors, as a last resort intervened in an attempt to save the Christians and Muslims, as reported by the British.[/FONT]
And the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians is still going on. In 1948 there were approximately 1.2 million Palestinians living in Israel. And now there are only just under 6 million of them left. It's a GENOCIDE I tell ya, a GENOCIDE!
Population Statistics - Israeli-Palestinian Conflict - ProCon.org
You have always demonstrated that you haven't a clue as to the definition of genocide. Look it up for once in your life.
Thus the Israeli willingness to be better trained and better armed than what the Islamist gee-had has to offer. That's why the wars of hoped-for annihilation waged by the various Arab incompetents have ended in humiliating failure.Armenia.........perhaps?There would not have been any "occupation" had the Arab countries not joined together to annihilate Israel while making the Palestinians refugees in the conflict.
As the British de-classified intelligence documents have confirmed. The European/Zionist invading Jews attacked the native people to kill or evict them and the Arab neighbors intervened to prevent the Jews from committing the war crimes of ethnic cleansing and genocide.
"
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'
"The documents, which have a remarkable contemporary resonance, reveal how British officials looked on as Jewish settlers took over more and more Arab land."
"In the weeks leading up to the partition of Palestine in 1948, when Britain gave up its UN mandate, Jewish terrorist groups were mounting increasing attacks..................."
After an increase in violent attacks by the militant Zionists of the Stern group and Irgun, [FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]British officials reported later in 1946: [/FONT]"Arab leaders appear to be still disposed to defer active opposition s[FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]o long as a chance of a political decision acceptable to Arab interests exists." [/FONT]
[FONT=Guardian Text Egyptian Web, Georgia, serif]British officials predicted war – and Arab defeat – in Palestine in 1948
As can be seen by the facts as reported by British intelligence, all of the crap you Zionist fanatics have been fed was bullshit. The Jews were the land grabbing, murderous terrorists and the Arabs deferred active opposition to the murderous Jewish invaders in the hope of a peaceful solution. The Arab neighbors, as a last resort intervened in an attempt to save the Christians and Muslims, as reported by the British.[/FONT]
And the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians is still going on. In 1948 there were approximately 1.2 million Palestinians living in Israel. And now there are only just under 6 million of them left. It's a GENOCIDE I tell ya, a GENOCIDE!
Population Statistics - Israeli-Palestinian Conflict - ProCon.org
You have always demonstrated that you haven't a clue as to the definition of genocide. Look it up for once in your life.
Of course Armenia, and the Jews in Europe and the Tutsis, etc., etc. And also the Palestinians.
"Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation.......It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups...."
Raphael Lemkin, Polish Jurist, 1942
