The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate

[Sixties Fan]

Tracking down statements can be difficult at times. Everyone "heard"/"read" it but years later, no one can find its source.

One such issue is, did Arabs threaten to throw the Jews into the sea, and when?

EOZ had this published tracing the history whether in 1948 or during the 1950s or on the eve of the 1967 war.




Of course, the "Palestine from the River to the Sea" chant basically means destroying Israel but it is not the same as actually throwing Jews into the sea. I noted previously a caricature of Israel as a ship sinking. Still, not exactly the same.

Well, we now have a testimony in real time, from August 1948*.

In this academic article on the machinations of British Intelligence Services during the 1940s, I read, on page 14, that England's Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin, "After being notified that the Arab leaders were blaming Britain for their defeat", instructed his diplomats in the Arab capitals, as well as in Washington and the UN, to respond that:
It is quite untrue to suggest that we have let the Arabs down or failed in any obligations towards them. We did not urge them to intervene by force in Palestine, nor did we promise them support if they did so. They went in of their own accord, in most cases without telling us beforehand. Very small measure of military successes which they achieved shows that their forces, while capable perhaps of occupying friendly territory, were not prepared for and incapable of undertaking major military operations, which would have been necessary to achieve the announced object of the Arab states, namely to drive the Jews into the sea.

I think that should settle matters.

The Jews to Go into the Sea

Tra c king down statements c an be diffi c ult at times. Everyone "heard"/"read" it but years later, no one c an find its sour ce . One su...

myrightword.blogspot.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

If Jordan annexed areas of western Palestine, that means there must have been an eastern Palestine - on the other side of the Jordan River.The term "West Bank" didn't exist yet, so AP called it the historically accurate "western Palestine."

1950 was less than three decades removed from the original partition of Palestine into western Palestine and Transjordan, so the terms "eastern" and "western" Palestine were still used. In the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, the phrases "Eastern Palestine" and "Western Palestine" were capitalized.

Somehow since then the world has forgotten about eastern Palestine, mostly due to Jordan's insistence that it is not Palestine - it is so insecure that its king still insists, even today, that nations assure it that they will not consider Jordan as a Palestinian state.

The only reason Jordan is so touchy on the subject is because it knows that at least parts of Jordan have always been considered part of Palestine - ever since the Israelites settled there.

(full article online)

Jordan is Palestine - according to AP in 1950

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

(More proof that the British Government never meant to honor the Mandate for Palestine for the Jewish Nation )

After surviving the Holocaust, trekking the Alps in winter and crossing the Mediterranean in an overcrowded boat, Rose Lipszyc clearly remembers her months incarcerated in harsh British camps in Cyprus.

“After all that, we were back behind barbed wire again,” 92-year-old Lipszyc said, speaking 75 years after British soldiers began imprisoning Jews on the eastern Mediterranean island, dark events whose legacy resonates today.

Lipszyc’s family, from the Polish city of Lublin, were among the six million Jews the Nazis massacred during World War II.

She was taken 250 kilometers (155 miles) northwest to Cyprus, also then under British rule.

Between August 1946 and February 1949, more than 52,000 Jews taken off 39 boats were detained in a dozen camps in Cyprus, according to Yad Vashem, Israel’s Holocaust memorial and education center.

“The English weren’t starving us, and they weren’t killing us like the Germans,” Lipszyc said. “But it was so traumatic, that the very same people who had freed me just a short time ago now incarcerated me.”

The British wanted the cramped camps to be a “deterrent” aimed at “breaking the power of the ‘Hebrew resistance movement’ in Palestine,” Yad Vashem said. More than 400 people died of sickness in the camps.

(full article online)

75 years on, harsh British detention of Holocaust survivors in Cyprus remembered

One of the last remaining metal huts that housed thousands of Jewish prisoners attempting to reach Israel will be the centerpiece of a new Jewish Museum in Larnaca

www.timesofisrael.com

 

[P F Tinmore]

(More proof that the British Government never meant to honor the Mandate for Palestine for the Jewish Nation )

After surviving the Holocaust, trekking the Alps in winter and crossing the Mediterranean in an overcrowded boat, Rose Lipszyc clearly remembers her months incarcerated in harsh British camps in Cyprus.

“After all that, we were back behind barbed wire again,” 92-year-old Lipszyc said, speaking 75 years after British soldiers began imprisoning Jews on the eastern Mediterranean island, dark events whose legacy resonates today.

Lipszyc’s family, from the Polish city of Lublin, were among the six million Jews the Nazis massacred during World War II.

She was taken 250 kilometers (155 miles) northwest to Cyprus, also then under British rule.

Between August 1946 and February 1949, more than 52,000 Jews taken off 39 boats were detained in a dozen camps in Cyprus, according to Yad Vashem, Israel’s Holocaust memorial and education center.

“The English weren’t starving us, and they weren’t killing us like the Germans,” Lipszyc said. “But it was so traumatic, that the very same people who had freed me just a short time ago now incarcerated me.”

The British wanted the cramped camps to be a “deterrent” aimed at “breaking the power of the ‘Hebrew resistance movement’ in Palestine,” Yad Vashem said. More than 400 people died of sickness in the camps.

(full article online)

75 years on, harsh British detention of Holocaust survivors in Cyprus remembered

One of the last remaining metal huts that housed thousands of Jewish prisoners attempting to reach Israel will be the centerpiece of a new Jewish Museum in Larnaca

www.timesofisrael.com

The Zionists had a different vision for the Jewish National Home than did the British.

The Zionists fucked everything up.

 

[Sixties Fan]

The Zionists had a different vision for the Jewish National Home than did the British.

The Zionists fucked everything up.

The British saw a Mandate for Palestine WITHOUT a Jewish National Home, proven by them giving 78% of it to the foreign Hashemites in 1922 and then doing everything not to help the Jews achieve the Mandate with the rest of it.

Hatred of Jews F...d everything. Just like your hatred for Jews which is no different.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The British saw a Mandate for Palestine WITHOUT a Jewish National Home, proven by them giving 78% of it to the foreign Hashemites in 1922 and then doing everything not to help the Jews achieve the Mandate with the rest of it.

Hatred of Jews F...d everything. Just like your hatred for Jews which is no different.

The problem was that the Zionists did not follow the program.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The problem was that the Zionists did not follow the program.

They kicked too much Arab ass........

 

[Sixties Fan]

The problem was that the Zionists did not follow the program.

You were never given "The Program", you do not know what "The Program" was, and most of all you COULD NOT CARE LESS ABOUT IT......

Because it was .....shhhhhhh.......The Jews.

 

[P F Tinmore]

You were never given "The Program", you do not know what "The Program" was, and most of all you COULD NOT CARE LESS ABOUT IT......

Because it was .....shhhhhhh.......The Jews.

The "program" was in the Mandate document and the LON Covenant.

Perhaps you should read them.

 

[Sixties Fan]

The "program" was in the Mandate document and the LON Covenant.

Perhaps you should read them.

You have never read them. There isn't one document about the Mandate, Balfour, San Remo, etc that you have been able to understand to this day.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Film: Remember Baghdad - Jewish Music Institute

Available to rent here Thursday 12 AugustRemember Baghdad: Iraq’s Last Jews Tell the Story of Their CountryWe have a screening of Fiona Murphy’s captivating documentary Remember Baghdad. Released in 2017, […]

www.jmi.org.uk

 

[Sixties Fan]

Richard Pollack writes in JNS:

I recently stumbled upon a photography book shot by the acclaimed Life magazine wartime photographer John Phillips. The large, innocuous-looking book was simply titled, A Will to Survive. After flipping through the pages, I realized I entered a time capsule that memorializes the Arab destruction of Jerusalem’s ancient Jewish Quarter in 1948.

Not only is it a dramatic firsthand account of the fall of the Jewish Quarter in 1948, but it documents the Arab Legion’s scorched-earth tactics that razed and burned to the ground every structure there, including all its synagogues and yeshivahs. The Arabs expelled all of the city’s residents, mainly defenseless, old Orthodox Jews. They were given about an hour to vacate homes that most extended families had lived in for centuries.

And there never has been a reckoning by any international body about the Arab Legion’s barbaric actions after it captured the Quarter.

To get his shots in May 1948, Phillips posed undercover in Jerusalem as a British officer in the Arab Legion. He also smuggled out his photos to avoid Arab censors who were eager to keep the sacking of the Jewish Quarter secret.

Phillips faced personal danger to do the shoot. He entered the Middle East undercover and wore the uniform of the Arab Legion, a British-created Arab army led by British officers, many of whom stayed on with their units to fight the Jews. “Mistaking me for a British officer, the Arab populace left me alone,” he wrote.

He was appalled about the Arab censorship. “Aware that the sack of the Jewish Quarter would shock the western world, Arab authorities across the Middle East tried to prevent the news from leaking out. Jerusalem could not be mentioned under any circumstances,” he wrote.

“I knew my pictures of the agony of the Jewish Quarter would end up in a censor’s wastepaper basket. I did not want this to happen and decided to smuggle them out of the Middle East.”

I found a copy of the book online. The photographs in the book are stunning.

Here is the Hurva synagogue in ruins.




A view of the destruction of the Jewish Quarter from what is now the Kotel plaza, with the Porat Yosef synagogue and yeshiva in the center.


Jews gathering for deportation in front of the destroyed Tiferet Israel synagogue.



More photos of Jews as they rush to leave - they had one hour to gather their belongings.

Here are Arabs looting the remains - including taking the Torah covers from a Sephardic synagogue, and a woman with a box of matzohs on her head.

This is what ethnic cleansing looks like.

Phillips returned in 1976 and interviewed dozens of Jews who had lived or fought in the final battle for the Old City in 1948.

(full article online)

A 1976 book documents the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Jerusalem in 1948 with stunning photographs

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

Even a cursory glance at contemporaneous Arab and Muslim newspapers and other Muslim media makes clear that it was Arab leaders who commanded the local Arab population to “flee” their homes in anticipation of the genocide of the Jews:

• On April 3, 1949 the Near East Arabic Broadcasting Station reported: “It must not be forgotten that the Arab Higher Committee encouraged the refugees’ flight from their homes in Jaffa, Haifa and Jerusalem”.
• 
  
• On October 12, 1963 the Egyptian daily “Akbar el Yom” reported that : “The 15th May, 1948 arrived…On that day the Mufti of Jerusalem (the Grand Mufti Amin al-Husseini) appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead”.
• 
  
• On April 9, 1953 the Jordanian daily “Al Urdan” reported: “For the flight and fall of the other villages it is our leaders who are responsible because of their dissemination of rumours exaggerating Jewish crimes and describing them as atrocities in order to inflame the Arabs… By spreading rumours of Jewish atrocities, killings of women and children etc., they instilled fear and terror in the hearts of the Arabs in Palestine, until they fled leaving their homes and properties to the enemy”.
• 
  
• Even the contemporaneous reporting of “The Economist” makes clear that the alleged “Nakba’ was self inflicted. On October 3, 1948 “The Economist” reported: “Of the 62,000 Arabs who formerly lived in Haifa not more than 5,000 or 6,000 remained. Various factors influenced their decision to seek safety in flight. There is but little doubt that the most potent of the factors were the announcements made over the air by the Higher Arab Executive, urging the Arabs to quit…It was clearly intimated that those Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades”.
• 
  
• On August 19, 1951 the Beirut weekly “Kul-Shay” opined: “Who brought the Palestinians to Lebanon as refugees, suffering now the malign attitude of newspapers and communal leaders, who have neither honor not conscience? Who brought them over in dire straits and penniless, after they lost their homes? The Arab states, and Lebanon amongst them, did it”.
• 
  
• The Arab National Committee in Jerusalem, following the Arab Higher Committee’s March 8, 1948 orders, instructed women, children, and the elderly living in Jerusalem to leave their homes: “Any opposition to this order … is an obstacle to the holy war … and will hamper the operations of the fighters in these districts.”
• 
  
• Furthermore, the Jordanian newspaper “Filastin” on February 19, 1949 stated: “The Arab States encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies, have failed to keep their promise to help these refugees”
• 
  
• The Syrian Prime Minister in 1948–49, Haled al Azm, also openly acknowledged the Arabs’ role in persuading the refugees to leave: “Since 1948 we have been demanding the return of the refugees to their homes. But we ourselves are the ones who encouraged them to leave.”

Anti Israel fanatics in the main stream media, on college campuses and in political circles cannot change the reality of what contemporaneous Muslim and Arab media reported.

(full article online)

Past time for ‘Telling The Truth’ about Palestinian lies

The Israelis expelled them in 1948? It is confounding that Jews fail to challenge these kinds of lies in any substantial way. Op-ed.

www.israelnationalnews.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Sub-Committee stated that “the General Assembly is not competent to recommend, still less to enforce any solution other than the recognition of the independence of Palestine” and that “the settlement of the future government of Palestine is a matter solely for the people of Palestine ...” The Sub-Committee, in its report to the Ad Hoc Committee, further stated that “partition involves the alienation of territory and the destruction of the integrity of the State of Palestine. The United Nations cannot make a disposition or alienation of territory, nor can it deprive the majority of the people of Palestine of their territory and transfer it to the exclusive use of a minority in the country ...”[14]

Palestinian-Israeli Conflict

 

[rylah]

“partition involves the alienation of territory and the destruction of the integrity of the State of Palestine. The United Nations cannot make a disposition or alienation of territory, nor can it deprive the majority of the people of Palestine of their territory and transfer it to the exclusive use of a minority in the country ...”[14]

Indeed, partition was the 'destruction of integrity'

of who's National Home?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
SUBTOPIC: Interpretation
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Yeah, just another attack on the General Assembly's "competence."

The Sub-Committee stated that “the General Assembly is not competent to recommend, still less to enforce any solution other than the recognition of the independence of Palestine” and that “the settlement of the future government of Palestine is a matter solely for the people of Palestine ...” The Sub-Committee, in its report to the Ad Hoc Committee, further stated that “partition involves the alienation of territory and the destruction of the integrity of the State of Palestine. The United Nations cannot make a disposition or alienation of territory, nor can it deprive the majority of the people of Palestine of their territory and transfer it to the exclusive use of a minority in the country ...”[14]

Palestinian-Israeli Conflict

(COMMENT)

The problem with this is → that it is a double-edged sword. IF the General Assembly (GA) is not competent to even make a "recommendation," THEN all the condemnations the GA issued against Israel are also questionable. And all the GA advocate for the conduct of the conflict by "Any Means" is dangerous. How can the GA make any recommendation of any consequence?

No, I really don't think you want to hang your hat on this "Sovereignty as the Crucial Issue of a Peaceful Settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict."


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

The problem with this is → that it is a double-edged sword. IF the General Assembly (GA) is not competent to even make a "recommendation,"

The problem was with resolution 181. Britain would not implement it. The Security Council would not implement it. It was widely condemned around the world.

Not so with other GA Resolutions.

 

[P F Tinmore]

No, I really don't think you want to hang your hat on this "Sovereignty as the Crucial Issue of a Peaceful Settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict."

It is Israel who rejects this.

Whether the United Nations, or any of its Member States, is competent to enforce or recommend the enforcement of any proposal concerning the constitution and future government of Palestine, in particular any plan of partition which is contrary to the wishes, or adopted without the consent, of the inhabitants of Palestine ...”

IOW, the Palestinians are the sovereigns of the territory just like the UN has stated in subsequent resolutions.

Such demarcations can only be made through bilateral agreement between the states concerned

All border arrangements must be with the Palestinians concent.