The tremendous power of the social paradigms created by WWII - Part I - The citizen

[aris2chat]

What do these pictures show but W.P. being used as it was intended, as a smokescreen. Now if hamas did not place civilians around their rocket launchers none would have been hurt

It's contradicted for use in densely population areas. Israel had smoke bombs at it's disposal that it could have used for a smoke screen but opted not to. Why did they lie about using it in the first place?

Instead of using a standard screen, Israel has now developed their own for use in gaza urban areas, WP free. Before they used what was in their arsenal. Sound, smoke, smell, what ever Israel uses is being attacked.....while Israel is still being attack with the most common of weapons to foreign imports smuggled to fire into Israel cities.

It is OK for Israel to be attacked but not for it to respond?

I never said it wasn't. That is a strawman.

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel change so they would not have to use a legal and fairly common type of screen. They used what they had, now they make their own. Even now with not WP they are still being condemned for the newer formulas.
Why should Israel not try to defend or protect their soldiers that need to respond against those trying to kill them, against those that attack and try to kill Israeli civilians? Against those to hide behind and kill their own people?

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel does not use WP any more. Other countries still do, but Israel has created their own screens for use in urban areas.

 

[Coyote]

It's contradicted for use in densely population areas. Israel had smoke bombs at it's disposal that it could have used for a smoke screen but opted not to. Why did they lie about using it in the first place?

Instead of using a standard screen, Israel has now developed their own for use in gaza urban areas, WP free. Before they used what was in their arsenal. Sound, smoke, smell, what ever Israel uses is being attacked.....while Israel is still being attack with the most common of weapons to foreign imports smuggled to fire into Israel cities.

It is OK for Israel to be attacked but not for it to respond?

I never said it wasn't. That is a strawman.

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel change so they would not have to use a legal and fairly common type of screen. They used what they had, now they make their own. Even now with not WP they are still being condemned for the newer formulas.
Why should Israel not try to defend or protect their soldiers that need to respond against those trying to kill them, against those that attack and try to kill Israeli civilians? Against those to hide behind and kill their own people?

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel does not use WP any more. Other countries still do, but Israel has created their own screens for use in urban areas.

You keep avoiding giving an actual answer to the question.

 

[aris2chat]

Instead of using a standard screen, Israel has now developed their own for use in gaza urban areas, WP free. Before they used what was in their arsenal. Sound, smoke, smell, what ever Israel uses is being attacked.....while Israel is still being attack with the most common of weapons to foreign imports smuggled to fire into Israel cities.

It is OK for Israel to be attacked but not for it to respond?

I never said it wasn't. That is a strawman.

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel change so they would not have to use a legal and fairly common type of screen. They used what they had, now they make their own. Even now with not WP they are still being condemned for the newer formulas.
Why should Israel not try to defend or protect their soldiers that need to respond against those trying to kill them, against those that attack and try to kill Israeli civilians? Against those to hide behind and kill their own people?

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel does not use WP any more. Other countries still do, but Israel has created their own screens for use in urban areas.

You keep avoiding giving an actual answer to the question.

it is past tense and it was not illegal

Why did hamas make their civilians targets of urban warfare? Why did hamas engage in attacking Israel or starting a war they could not win? Why did hamas sacrifice their own people by provoking Israel?

 

[P F Tinmore]

I never said it wasn't. That is a strawman.

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel change so they would not have to use a legal and fairly common type of screen. They used what they had, now they make their own. Even now with not WP they are still being condemned for the newer formulas.
Why should Israel not try to defend or protect their soldiers that need to respond against those trying to kill them, against those that attack and try to kill Israeli civilians? Against those to hide behind and kill their own people?

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel does not use WP any more. Other countries still do, but Israel has created their own screens for use in urban areas.

You keep avoiding giving an actual answer to the question.

it is past tense and it was not illegal

Why did hamas make their civilians targets of urban warfare? Why did hamas engage in attacking Israel or starting a war they could not win? Why did hamas sacrifice their own people by provoking Israel?

The blockade was there first.

A blockade is an act of war.

 

[montelatici]

I never said it wasn't. That is a strawman.

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel change so they would not have to use a legal and fairly common type of screen. They used what they had, now they make their own. Even now with not WP they are still being condemned for the newer formulas.
Why should Israel not try to defend or protect their soldiers that need to respond against those trying to kill them, against those that attack and try to kill Israeli civilians? Against those to hide behind and kill their own people?

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel does not use WP any more. Other countries still do, but Israel has created their own screens for use in urban areas.

You keep avoiding giving an actual answer to the question.

it is past tense and it was not illegal

Why did hamas make their civilians targets of urban warfare? Why did hamas engage in attacking Israel or starting a war they could not win? Why did hamas sacrifice their own people by provoking Israel?

Like all occupied/colonized people, their only hope is that they will eventually win. The Algerians, the non-white South Africans, the non-white Rhodesians, the Indians, the Vietnamese etc.

 

[Phoenall]

In December of 2013 Gaza flooded. As this was happening, it was the Israelis that were putting together food packages, and blankets and sanitary items and blankets and coats and sending them to the Palestinians. As this was happening, the accusations were made that Israel intentionally flooded Gaza by releasing water from a dam. Except there was no dam. When supplies were sent in (like pumps), the accusation was made that Israel was taking advantage of the situation.

Israel has always taken this seriously. There really is no other alternative.

I don't deny that there is a lot of humanitarian generosity from the Israeli people. Yet it seems to be a split society. There is also a lot of hate towards the Palestinians, as given by the links I posted.

There are Arab Israelis that serve in the military and they don't have to. There is Wahat Al-Salam which has been around since 1970. Jewish families moved to Silwan. Arab families live in French Hill. Hebrew and Arabic are the national languages. We have to pretend that there are no Palestinian Arabs in Israel for there to be this separation where Jewish people never come into contact.

Prior to Civil Rights in the US there were many blacks who served in the army, even when there wasn't conscription and they did not have to.

The Palestinians who are not Israeli citizens are largely seperated from the Israeli's by walls, check points and seperate systems of roads.

The fact that Hebrew and Arabic are the national languages is a legacy of the Mandate. There is actually a political move to make only Hebrew the national language.

I would say there is quite a bit of empathy. This empathy occurs while knowing that American tax dollars pay the salaries of those Palestinians imprisoned in Israel for terrorist acts that kill Israelis. Those ones that will at some point be swapped or released back to Gaza with a celebration.

And American tax dollars support the Israeli military incursions into Gaza, something which has led to huge civilian casualties and in Operation Cast Lead the use of white phosphorous in a dense civilian area.,

The white phosphorous was used legally. The Red Cross could find no evidence that it was used illegally. This is why they had to back track and instead focus on "dense civilian area". They didn't have anything.
The Operation in Gaza-Factual and Legal Aspects

And this wouldn't be a problem if Hamas and Islamic Jihad was eradicated.

This is not "segregation".

This is not similar to the Civil Right's Movement in the US in any way, shape or form. I am aware that the Palestinians PR move was to align themselves with Ferguson. That doesn't play.

There is no rising tide of racism in Israel. This is not a situation of "language is a barrier" as I stated earlier Arabic and Hebrew are the national languages. There are pockets of assholes.

Lastly, Israel is a client state. It makes zero sense for the money given to the Palestinians from this Donor country to pay the salaries of terrorists. Zero.

White Phosphorous was used illegally, do you think linking to a paper published by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs that denies the facts convinces anyone but brainwashed Zionnutters like yourself?

The Israeli oppression of non-Jews is more similar to South African Apartheid than the civil rights situation in the U.S.

The rest of your comments are Hasbara talking points.

Since when has South Africa been in Palestine ? DO TRY AND KEEP ON TOPIC and not deflecting when the thread is getting away from you.

Ahh, the old projection trick. Phoney, stick to the subject and quit playing senile games while posting.

Not me that is bringing in OFF TOPIC reports to try and deflect the thread. As I said since when has South Africa been in Palestine, or Palestine in South Africa. If you cant keep to the Israeli/Palestine topic then go somewhere else.

 

[Phoenall]

Israel change so they would not have to use a legal and fairly common type of screen. They used what they had, now they make their own. Even now with not WP they are still being condemned for the newer formulas.
Why should Israel not try to defend or protect their soldiers that need to respond against those trying to kill them, against those that attack and try to kill Israeli civilians? Against those to hide behind and kill their own people?

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel does not use WP any more. Other countries still do, but Israel has created their own screens for use in urban areas.

You keep avoiding giving an actual answer to the question.

it is past tense and it was not illegal

Why did hamas make their civilians targets of urban warfare? Why did hamas engage in attacking Israel or starting a war they could not win? Why did hamas sacrifice their own people by provoking Israel?

The blockade was there first.

A blockade is an act of war.

No the blockade went on in 2007 the attacks on Israel started in August 2005. The same time that Israel gave in to the Palestinian demands that Oslo 2 be implemented so that peace talks could be held. Palestinian he talk with forked tongue and out of backside.
A rocket attack is an act of war, so the blockade was in answer to those many thousands of acts of war.

 

[Phoenall]

Israel change so they would not have to use a legal and fairly common type of screen. They used what they had, now they make their own. Even now with not WP they are still being condemned for the newer formulas.
Why should Israel not try to defend or protect their soldiers that need to respond against those trying to kill them, against those that attack and try to kill Israeli civilians? Against those to hide behind and kill their own people?

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel does not use WP any more. Other countries still do, but Israel has created their own screens for use in urban areas.

You keep avoiding giving an actual answer to the question.

it is past tense and it was not illegal

Why did hamas make their civilians targets of urban warfare? Why did hamas engage in attacking Israel or starting a war they could not win? Why did hamas sacrifice their own people by provoking Israel?

Like all occupied/colonized people, their only hope is that they will eventually win. The Algerians, the non-white South Africans, the non-white Rhodesians, the Indians, the Vietnamese etc.

They lost when they made the first terrorist attack on unarmed Jews, now they face constant humiliation and deprevation because they are too pig headed to accept reality

 

[Dante]

Some of you may remember...

Leon Klinghoffer

 

[P F Tinmore]

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel does not use WP any more. Other countries still do, but Israel has created their own screens for use in urban areas.

You keep avoiding giving an actual answer to the question.

it is past tense and it was not illegal

Why did hamas make their civilians targets of urban warfare? Why did hamas engage in attacking Israel or starting a war they could not win? Why did hamas sacrifice their own people by provoking Israel?

The blockade was there first.

A blockade is an act of war.

No the blockade went on in 2007 the attacks on Israel started in August 2005. The same time that Israel gave in to the Palestinian demands that Oslo 2 be implemented so that peace talks could be held. Palestinian he talk with forked tongue and out of backside.
A rocket attack is an act of war, so the blockade was in answer to those many thousands of acts of war.

Not true. Try again.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, I give you, this argument to a point; your position and explanations are both strong and compelling. It was a colonization project, pursuant to the Mandate and Articles 4 and 6.

No matter the intention of the allied powers, the Zionists had colonization in their plan and that is what happened.

Look at the facts on the ground. It is a colonial project.

(COMMENT)

One key intention of the mandate was to:

• establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people,
• secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home,
• facilitate Jewish immigration, for reconstituting their national home.

To accomplish those tasks, you need organization and planning. So, by definition, it is project.

Most Respectfully,
R

When you look at San Remo, the Balfour declaration, the LoN, and the mandate, none of them called for a Jewish state. They all called for a safe place in Palestine for the Jews with the Palestinians while (more or less) respecting the rights of the native population. Britain specifically stated that there would not be a Jewish state against the will of the people and even refused to implement the failed resolution 181 because it was not accepted by both sides.

The creation of Israel was a strictly unilateral move by the foreign Zionists with no legitimacy from any of the previous actions.

The concept of popular sovereignty is that the legitimacy of a government is derived from the will of the people. Israel was created with the virtually unanimous opposition of the native population including the native Jews. The Israeli government, over 65 years later, is still rejected by the vast majority of Palestine's native people.

Israel continues to colonize Palestine as we speak.

 

[Mindful]

Some of you may remember the thread I created last year about the dehumanization of the palestinian people in which I explained how WWII represented a huge paradigm shift in the way western states defined themselves and the human value assigned to the world Jewry and the native inhabitants of Palestine.

Dehumanization Palestinians most powerful enemy US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This thread will provide a series of practical examples that will show how all these paradigms are not merely arcane, abstract concepts with little to no connection with the "real world".

They are real, concrete ideas that model the way of thinking of most countries around the world, both governments and citizens.

This is the first thread of a trilogy that will prove the big impact of these paradigms.

I will "extract" these paradigms from the threads and posts of an average western citizen, our fellow member Coyote first, and later, from the posts of JakeStarkey, Sallow, High Gravity, Sealybobo, etc...

So let's briefly recap the paradigms WWII created:

1 - Total racial equality among all racial groups of a given country.

2 - The super humanization of the jewish people.

3 - The dehumanization of the palestinian people.

4 - The redefinition of western countries as multi-racial nations without a predominant ethnic identity

This thread ain't worth a pair o' dimes.

I've never read such crap. More Jew hangups.

Prominent ethnic identity? Countries like Britain and Germany positively encourage it.

 

[José]

Originally posted by Coyote
And, quite frankly, when a nation under attack by rocket fire or other artillary they have the right to defend their citizens by what ever means necessary. That is the right of any nation. I'm not sure why you think it would mean any nation but Israel.

You've just proved the entire point of this thread for me.

You believe the children and grandchildren of the european settlers who didn't have any historical right to consider Palestine their homeland, to destroy the ethnic composition of Palestine without the consent of the native population let alone split their homeland, impose a jewish state on them and kept them corraled in ethnic enclaves, you believe they have the right to continue to deny the birthright of the palestinian people to live in 70% of their homeland and murder them if they fight to break free from the enclaves and end their exile.

You DEFINITELY do not perceive the palestinian people as a group of human beings entitled to the same set of rights as Ruby Bridges.

You DEFINITELY assimilated the dehumanising paradigm through which the society you were born into (the United States of the second half of the 20th century) perceive the native people of Palestine.

I rest my case.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I'm not sure I agree.

P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, I give you, this argument to a point; your position and explanations are both strong and compelling. It was a colonization project, pursuant to the Mandate and Articles 4 and 6.

No matter the intention of the allied powers, the Zionists had colonization in their plan and that is what happened.

Look at the facts on the ground. It is a colonial project.

(COMMENT)

One key intention of the mandate was to:

• establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people,
• secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home,
• facilitate Jewish immigration, for reconstituting their national home.

To accomplish those tasks, you need organization and planning. So, by definition, it is project.

Most Respectfully,
R

When you look at San Remo, the Balfour declaration, the LoN, and the mandate, none of them called for a Jewish state. They all called for a safe place in Palestine for the Jews with the Palestinians while (more or less) respecting the rights of the native population. Britain specifically stated that there would not be a Jewish state against the will of the people and even refused to implement the failed resolution 181 because it was not accepted by both sides.

(COMMENT)

This is a bit disingenuous. The UK participation was conditional. The UK said that it couldn't do it by themselves ("could not alone implement any plan not accepted by both sides)." It was not a refusal - merely an intention not to participate. It was recognition that there would be an outbreak of hostilities as the Partition Plan was implemented:

"(iv) the United Kingdom Government “will endeavour to give the Commission the benefit of their experience and knowledge of the situation in Palestine, subject always to their decision that they are unable to take part in the implementation of the United Nations plan. That is, of course, in accordance with the statement made originally to the General Assembly by the Colonial Secretary to the effect that we could not alone implement any plan not accepted by both sides; and that as regards joining in any implementation, that would depend on two conditions. The Commission will remember that one was the inherent justice of the plan, an the other was the degree of force requisite for its implementation.” SOURCE: Paragraph 8 --- FIRST MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT TO THE SECURITY COUNCIL​

3. At the twenty-fifth meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question, the United Kingdom Representative, in making clear the extent to which the role assigned to his Government by the Report of Sub-Committee 1 was compatible with the declared intention of his Government not to participate in the implementation of a plan of partition, stated: “If a scheme of partition were approved and a United Nations Commission set up, the Palestine Government would, when the time came, hand over its authority to that Commission”. SOURCE: UNITED NATIONS PALESTINE COMMISSION Note for Sir Alexander Cadogan​

The creation of Israel was a strictly unilateral move by the foreign Zionists with no legitimacy from any of the previous actions.

(COMMENT)

This is debatable. Yes, in the sense of exercising the Right of Self-Determination, Israel did declare independence; as a people emerging into sovereign statehood and independence. But in doing so, the Jewish People took action in total coordination with the UN Palestine Commission (the successor Government) and pursuant to Part I --- Section B (Steps Preparatory to Independence), Paragraph 4 --- UN Resolution 181(II), wherein:

4. The Commission, after consultation with the democratic parties and other public organizations of The Arab and Jewish States, shall select and establish in each State as rapidly as possible a Provisional Council of Government. The activities of both the Arab and Jewish Provisional Councils of Government shall be carried out under the general direction of the Commission.

If by 1 April 1948 a Provisional Council of Government cannot be selected for either of the States, or, if selected, cannot carry out its functions, the Commission shall communicate that fact to the Security Council for such action with respect to that State as the Security Council may deem proper, and to the Secretary-General for communication to the Members of the United Nations.​

AND by following the instruction as prescribed in Part I --- Sections C and D - as an integral part of the process. As noted in GA Resolution A/RES/273 (III) Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations (11 May 1949): "Recalling its resolutions of 29 November 1947 3/ and 11 December 1948 4/ and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel 5/ before the ad hoc Political Committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions," the process was completed by the people of Israel.

The concept of popular sovereignty is that the legitimacy of a government is derived from the will of the people. Israel was created with the virtually unanimous opposition of the native population including the native Jews. The Israeli government, over 65 years later, is still rejected by the vast majority of Palestine's native people.

Israel continues to colonize Palestine as we speak.

(COMMENT)

Israel emerged after a War of Independence; after successfully defending its declaration and right to self-determination from external and offensive interference from Arab Aggression by multiple members of the Arab League.

Israel continues to colonize Palestine as we speak.

(COMMENT)

I'm not so sure that "colonize" is the right word. Is it exercising its right under the terms of the Oslo Accords; as agreed to by the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian People?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[aris2chat]

P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, I give you, this argument to a point; your position and explanations are both strong and compelling. It was a colonization project, pursuant to the Mandate and Articles 4 and 6.

No matter the intention of the allied powers, the Zionists had colonization in their plan and that is what happened.

Look at the facts on the ground. It is a colonial project.

(COMMENT)

One key intention of the mandate was to:

• establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people,
• secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home,
• facilitate Jewish immigration, for reconstituting their national home.

To accomplish those tasks, you need organization and planning. So, by definition, it is project.

Most Respectfully,
R

depends on what the meaning of "is" is.......

 

[aris2chat]

It's discussed in the the link I posted.

Nowhere in that link does it say that Israelis don't encounter Palestinians or there is any separation. It's nothing more than article on price tagging. By and large, price tagging is committed by punk ass kids like these:
Elder Palestinians protect settlers from lynching in West Bank village - National News - Jerusalem Post

That's from 2011
88 of Jewish Israelis oppose price tag attacks - National News - Jerusalem Post

Other
Jewish and Arab students show solidarity after price-tag fire at school - Arab-Israeli Conflict - Jerusalem Post

This is from August of 2014, detailing concerns about increase in racism.

Israeli Teens Gripped by Virulent Racism Forward.com

On the other hand, Israel is taking this seriously - many feel this is not the society they want for themselves:
After War Israeli Schools to Teach Tolerance for Arabs - Israel Today Israel News
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/28/w...fter-palestinians-beating.html?pagewanted=all

On the effects of a decade long policy of strict separation: Is There Any Empathy Left In The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Parallels NPR

In December of 2013 Gaza flooded. As this was happening, it was the Israelis that were putting together food packages, and blankets and sanitary items and blankets and coats and sending them to the Palestinians. As this was happening, the accusations were made that Israel intentionally flooded Gaza by releasing water from a dam. Except there was no dam. When supplies were sent in (like pumps), the accusation was made that Israel was taking advantage of the situation.

Israel has always taken this seriously. There really is no other alternative.

I don't deny that there is a lot of humanitarian generosity from the Israeli people. Yet it seems to be a split society. There is also a lot of hate towards the Palestinians, as given by the links I posted.

There are Arab Israelis that serve in the military and they don't have to. There is Wahat Al-Salam which has been around since 1970. Jewish families moved to Silwan. Arab families live in French Hill. Hebrew and Arabic are the national languages. We have to pretend that there are no Palestinian Arabs in Israel for there to be this separation where Jewish people never come into contact.

Prior to Civil Rights in the US there were many blacks who served in the army, even when there wasn't conscription and they did not have to.

The Palestinians who are not Israeli citizens are largely seperated from the Israeli's by walls, check points and seperate systems of roads.

The fact that Hebrew and Arabic are the national languages is a legacy of the Mandate. There is actually a political move to make only Hebrew the national language.

I would say there is quite a bit of empathy. This empathy occurs while knowing that American tax dollars pay the salaries of those Palestinians imprisoned in Israel for terrorist acts that kill Israelis. Those ones that will at some point be swapped or released back to Gaza with a celebration.

And American tax dollars support the Israeli military incursions into Gaza, something which has led to huge civilian casualties and in Operation Cast Lead the use of white phosphorous in a dense civilian area.,

The white phosphorous was used legally. The Red Cross could find no evidence that it was used illegally. This is why they had to back track and instead focus on "dense civilian area". They didn't have anything.
The Operation in Gaza-Factual and Legal Aspects

And this wouldn't be a problem if Hamas and Islamic Jihad was eradicated.

This is not "segregation".

This is not similar to the Civil Right's Movement in the US in any way, shape or form. I am aware that the Palestinians PR move was to align themselves with Ferguson. That doesn't play.

There is no rising tide of racism in Israel. This is not a situation of "language is a barrier" as I stated earlier Arabic and Hebrew are the national languages. There are pockets of assholes.

Lastly, Israel is a client state. It makes zero sense for the money given to the Palestinians from this Donor country to pay the salaries of terrorists. Zero.

The ferguson shooting was a justified kill. If the palestinian PR want to play games then Israeli response is justified.

 

[aris2chat]

I knew that Israel was a colonial project long before I found out that the Zionists actually had a colonial office.
Why would they have a colonial office if was not a colonial project?

This colonial project was started by proto-Zionists, who were Christians (converts, like Disraeli) who believed in the existence of the "Jewish race" before WWI.

The British elite even believed that they are descendants of Hebrews.

British Israelism (also called Anglo-Israelism) is a doctrine based on the hypothesis that people ofWestern European descent, particularly those in Great Britain, are the direct lineal descendants of theTen Lost Tribes of Israel. The doctrine often includes the tenet that the British Royal Family is directly descended from the line of King David.

British Israelism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The outcome of WWI and the continuation of this war (WWII was just the continuation of WWI) was influenced by Zionism, and Zionism was originally a British projects, and these British Zionists called themselves "Christian".

Lord Lindsay wrote in 1847: "The soil of Palestine still enjoys her sabbaths, and only waits for the return of her banished children, and the application of industry, commensurate with her agricultural capabilities, to burst once more into universal luxuriance, and be all that she ever was in the days of Solomon."[19]

In 1851, correspondence between Lord Stanley, whose father became British Prime Minister the following year, and Benjamin Disraeli, who became Chancellor of the Exchequer alongside him, records Disraeli's proto-Zionist views:

"He then unfolded a plan of restoring the nation to Palestine—said the country was admirably suited for them—the financiers all over Europe might help—the Porte is weak—the Turks/holders of property could be bought out—this, he said, was the object of his life...." Coningsby was merely a feelermy views were not fully developed at that time—since then all I have written has been for one purpose. The man who should restore the Hebrew race to their country would be the Messiah—the real saviour of prophecy!"

He did not add formally that he aspired to play this part, but it was evidently implied. He thought very highly of the capabilities of the country, and hinted that his chief object in acquiring power here would be to promote the return".[20][21] 26 years later, Disraeli wrote in his article entitled

"The Jewish Question is the Oriental Quest" (1877) that within fifty years, a nation of one million Jews would reside in Palestine under the guidance of the British.

Sir Moses Montefiore visited the Land of Israel seven times and fostered its development.[15]

In 1842, Mormon leader Joseph Smith, Jr. sent a representative, Orson Hyde, to dedicate the land of Israel for the return of the Jews.[22]Protestant theologian William Eugene Blackstone submitted a petition to the US president in 1891; the Blackstone Memorial called for the return of Palestine to the Jews.

History of Zionism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Lloyd George was determined, as early as March 1917, that Palestine should become British and that he would rely on its conquest by British troops to obtain the abrogation of the Sykes-Picot Agreement.

In the new British strategic thinking, the Zionists appeared as a potential ally capable of safeguarding British imperial interests in the region.

Furthermore, as British war prospects dimmed throughout 1917, the War Cabinet calculated that supporting a Jewish entity in Palestine would mobilize America's influential Jewish community to support United States intervention in the war and sway the large number of Jewish Bolsheviks who participated in the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution to keep Russia in the war.

Fears were also voiced in the Foreign Office that if Britain did not come out in favor of a Jewish entity in Palestine the Germans would preempt them.

Finally, both Lloyd George and Balfour were devout churchgoers who attached great religious significance to the proposed reinstatement of the Jews in their ancient homeland.

Palestine During World War I Jewish Virtual Library

Today there are millions of Christians in the USA who call themselves "Zionists", and only dew to the support of these "useful idiots" the descendants of Khazars can keep their colonial project going on.

Parliamentary oath had to as a christian, at that time. Disraeli tried to get the oath change to permit jews to take office.

 

[aris2chat]

In December of 2013 Gaza flooded. As this was happening, it was the Israelis that were putting together food packages, and blankets and sanitary items and blankets and coats and sending them to the Palestinians. As this was happening, the accusations were made that Israel intentionally flooded Gaza by releasing water from a dam. Except there was no dam. When supplies were sent in (like pumps), the accusation was made that Israel was taking advantage of the situation.

Israel has always taken this seriously. There really is no other alternative.

I don't deny that there is a lot of humanitarian generosity from the Israeli people. Yet it seems to be a split society. There is also a lot of hate towards the Palestinians, as given by the links I posted.

There are Arab Israelis that serve in the military and they don't have to. There is Wahat Al-Salam which has been around since 1970. Jewish families moved to Silwan. Arab families live in French Hill. Hebrew and Arabic are the national languages. We have to pretend that there are no Palestinian Arabs in Israel for there to be this separation where Jewish people never come into contact.

Prior to Civil Rights in the US there were many blacks who served in the army, even when there wasn't conscription and they did not have to.

The Palestinians who are not Israeli citizens are largely seperated from the Israeli's by walls, check points and seperate systems of roads.

The fact that Hebrew and Arabic are the national languages is a legacy of the Mandate. There is actually a political move to make only Hebrew the national language.

I would say there is quite a bit of empathy. This empathy occurs while knowing that American tax dollars pay the salaries of those Palestinians imprisoned in Israel for terrorist acts that kill Israelis. Those ones that will at some point be swapped or released back to Gaza with a celebration.

And American tax dollars support the Israeli military incursions into Gaza, something which has led to huge civilian casualties and in Operation Cast Lead the use of white phosphorous in a dense civilian area.,

The white phosphorous was used legally. The Red Cross could find no evidence that it was used illegally. This is why they had to back track and instead focus on "dense civilian area". They didn't have anything.
The Operation in Gaza-Factual and Legal Aspects

And this wouldn't be a problem if Hamas and Islamic Jihad was eradicated.

This is not "segregation".

This is not similar to the Civil Right's Movement in the US in any way, shape or form. I am aware that the Palestinians PR move was to align themselves with Ferguson. That doesn't play.

There is no rising tide of racism in Israel. This is not a situation of "language is a barrier" as I stated earlier Arabic and Hebrew are the national languages. There are pockets of assholes.

Lastly, Israel is a client state. It makes zero sense for the money given to the Palestinians from this Donor country to pay the salaries of terrorists. Zero.

What do these pictures show but W.P. being used as it was intended, as a smokescreen. Now if hamas did not place civilians around their rocket launchers none would have been hurt

It's contradicted for use in densely population areas. Israel had smoke bombs at it's disposal that it could have used for a smoke screen but opted not to. Why did they lie about using it in the first place?

not generally used at night.

 

[aris2chat]

It's contradicted for use in densely population areas. Israel had smoke bombs at it's disposal that it could have used for a smoke screen but opted not to. Why did they lie about using it in the first place?

Instead of using a standard screen, Israel has now developed their own for use in gaza urban areas, WP free. Before they used what was in their arsenal. Sound, smoke, smell, what ever Israel uses is being attacked.....while Israel is still being attack with the most common of weapons to foreign imports smuggled to fire into Israel cities.

It is OK for Israel to be attacked but not for it to respond?

I never said it wasn't. That is a strawman.

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel change so they would not have to use a legal and fairly common type of screen. They used what they had, now they make their own. Even now with not WP they are still being condemned for the newer formulas.
Why should Israel not try to defend or protect their soldiers that need to respond against those trying to kill them, against those that attack and try to kill Israeli civilians? Against those to hide behind and kill their own people?

Is it ok to use WP in densely populated civilian areas when other devices capable of creating smoke with less human damage are available?

Israel does not use WP any more. Other countries still do, but Israel has created their own screens for use in urban areas.

You might not like it but at the time the screen was used correctly. Most weapons had not been designed for "urban" warfare. Israel has since designed many of their own out of necessity.

Why were so many civilians outside in the area as the Israeli troops advanced? Since most of the WP was used in the evening, Why were so many civilians out at night in those areas? Most would move away from fighting or stay inside rather become targets.
When rockets were flying in town, I would watch from the balcony. When they were landing around my home, we were down in the basement or we got out of the way before hand to safer area.

 

[Phoenall]

Israel does not use WP any more. Other countries still do, but Israel has created their own screens for use in urban areas.

You keep avoiding giving an actual answer to the question.

it is past tense and it was not illegal

Why did hamas make their civilians targets of urban warfare? Why did hamas engage in attacking Israel or starting a war they could not win? Why did hamas sacrifice their own people by provoking Israel?

The blockade was there first.

A blockade is an act of war.

No the blockade went on in 2007 the attacks on Israel started in August 2005. The same time that Israel gave in to the Palestinian demands that Oslo 2 be implemented so that peace talks could be held. Palestinian he talk with forked tongue and out of backside.
A rocket attack is an act of war, so the blockade was in answer to those many thousands of acts of war.

Not true. Try again.

Blockade of the Gaza Strip - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The blockades of the Gaza Strip refers to a land, air, and sea blockade on the Gaza Strip by Israel from 2007 to present.

Following the takeover, Egypt and Israel largely sealed their border crossings with Gaza, on the grounds that Fatah had fled and was no longer providing security on the Palestinian side.[4]

Israel maintains that the blockade is necessary to limit Palestinian rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip on its cities and to prevent Hamas from obtaining other weapon




So yes it is TRUE and history backs up my post