What agreement are you referring to? may I see it?
That's like saying Britain "invaded" Europe though during WW2, more accurate to say they came to the aid of Europeans against a demonic racist political regime, much as the Arabs did after years and years of warning that they would.
Let's see shall we...
Most of them died, I thought you knew about all that?
Just click "Play" and you'll hear him say it, go on, I already prepositioned it for you:
The Arabs sided with Nazi Germany because of a shared politico-religious ideology that included scapegoating Jews.
Where did I state, that the USA had allied itself with Nazi-Germany?? - you nitwit.
So what factual errors can you spot in what Prof. Chomsky says in this address to the UN General Assembly (800 people in the audience and it was televised) ten years ago? point them out for us so we can discuss them. This was ten years ago, about 2,000 Palestinians and 6 Jews had just been killed you know, same old same old.
The ICC issued arrest warrants, you need to face reality here.
There really aren't any antisemitic Muslims, antizionist yes but not antisemitic.
I never called anyone a liar. Quote my lie
You're obviously too dumb as well, to read
Over the deep edge there, Krusty. Learn something you're ignorant about.
I said "effectively calling all those elderly Jews liars". I was characterizing your position of denying Israeli apartheid and racial supremacy.
That's the colonial partition plan that the Arab parties refused to accept because it removed the right of self determination of Arabs. So it was hardly an agreement, a proposal yes but never an agreement.
They did, they allied with him
It's comical when moslems whine about Israeli apartheid because it's so easily shown to be rants from ignorant islamics.
There was no occupation or invasion, except by the occupying, invading Arabs.
It was the two state solution, that was in place until Jordan, Syria et al invaded and lost biglyThat's the colonial partition plan that the Arab parties refused to accept because it removed the right of self determination of Arabs. So it was hardly an agreement, a proposal yes but never an agreement.
This warning, this is the cablegram sent to the UN in May 15 1948, here's a few excerpts:
And I asked what quote something I wrote that called them that. Or you're a liar.
What garbage.That's the colonial partition plan that the Arab parties refused to accept because it removed the right of self determination of Arabs. So it was hardly an agreement, a proposal yes but never an agreement.
This warning, this is the explanatory cablegram sent to the UN in May 15 1948. This was sent on the very same day that the British mandate ended:
The Arabs never accepted the partition plan, it was a violation of the people's right to self determination once the British mandate ended.
Such a "solution" could have been put to the vote, but it was not, it was imposed by outside colonial powers, that's a breach of the UN charter in that it denies the right to self determination. There was no effort to have the people of Palestine vote on partitioning. The goal was always to colonize Palestine and nothing has changed, the Zionists are once again in Syria and Lebanon and are today continuing to create "settlements" illegally.
The Palestinians do not want to be "given" anything they simply want that which was stolen to be returned, why would any sane person deny them that?
