When Will They Ever Learn?

[Phoenall]

Nothing at all wrong about persons having suffered under Apartheid recognizing that Israel is an Apartheid state. All your attempt at denying an inconvenient truth won't change the assessment of people that have experienced Apartheid.

The inconvenient truth is that you have made no case that Israel is an apartheid state. Your attempts at denying your own incompetence at understanding terms and definitions is no ones fault but your own.

We certainly can, however, make a case for Islamism being fascist

.Christians in the Palestinian Territories | Jewish Virtual Library

The Christian community in the areas administered by the Palestinian Authority (PA) is a small but symbolically important one. About 35,000 Christians live in the West Bank and 3,000 in Gaza,1 representing about 1.3 percent of Palestinians. In addition, 12,500 Christians reside in eastern Jerusalem.

This population is rapidly dwindling, however, and not solely as a result of the difficult military and economic situation. Rather, there are numerous indications that the Christian population is beleaguered due to its Christianity. Taken in context of the condition of Christians in other Middle Eastern countries, this picture is especially credible and troubling.

A Second-Class People
Under Islam, Christians are considered dhimmi, a tolerated but second class who are afforded protection by Islam. Dhimmitude is integral to Islam; it is a "protection pact" that suspends "the [Muslim] conqueror's initial right to kill or enslave [Jews and Christians], provided they submitted themselves to pay tribute."

You give me too much credit. I simply quoted South Africans, including South African Jews, that lived under Apartheid.

"Africa is a Country has published its first ebook, “Apartheid Israel: The Politics of an Analogy.” The ebook was edited by Jon Soske and Sean Jacobs. The contributors to the ebook areAchille Mbembe,Salim Vally, Andy Clarno, Arianna Lissoni, T.J. Tallie, Bill Freund, Marissa Moorman, Shireen Hassim, Robin D.G. Kelley, Heidi Grunebaum, and Melissa Levin. You can read the ebook here. Design and layout by Sam Clemence) This is the introduction:

We invited eleven scholars of Africa and its diaspora to reflect on the analogy between apartheid South Africa and contemporary Israel. The American Studies Association’s decision in February 2014 to endorse the academic boycott of Israel, followed by the state violence directed against the inhabitants of Gaza this past July, has intensified the debate over Israel/Palestine in universities across North America. The international, nonviolent campaign for boycott, divestment, and sanctions against Israel is gaining momentum by the day.

Most of the contributions to this forum underline the obvious similarities between apartheid South Africa and Israeli policies toward the Palestinians. As Robin D.G. Kelley writes: “That Israel and its colonial occupation meet the UN’s definition of an apartheid state is beyond dispute.” Both apartheid South Africa and the Israeli state originated through a process of conquest and settlement largely justified on the grounds of religion and ethnic nationalism. Both pursued a legalized, large-scale program of displacing the earlier inhabitants from their land. Both instituted a variety of discriminatory laws based on racial or ethnic grounds. Outside of a tiny group of pro-Zionist organizations, the analogy is so widely accepted in South Africa that it draws little controversy. Indeed, leading members of the anti-apartheid struggle, including Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Jewish struggle veterans like Ronnie Kasrils, have repeatedly stated that the conditions in the West Bank and Gaza are “worse than apartheid.”

Apartheid Israel: The Politics of an Analogy

Well honestly, the only thing I can give you credit for is sidestepping and obfuscation. It's comically tragic that your only defense for islamist fascism is some long cut and paste that you dont understand is just so much more of your usual spam.

There is a term that describes one group of people who set themselves apart from others via a belief that they are superior. The term is fascism. To explicitly identify a group of people as inferior and worthy of revulsion, ie: (non-muhammedans), while holding yourself as superior and deserving of greater rights for no other reason than a particular politico-religious ideology is fascism, pure and simple, unadulterated. Study the events that occurred in Germany during the 1930's if you need an instructive lesson in fascism. Or, study Islamic history for comparable lessons.

You've described the Zionists. Thanks.

No as I know many Zionists, and not one see's themselves as being superior to anyone else. We are better educated, more worldly wise and have a far better grasp of reality but that does not make us superior. And remember freddy boy that not all Zionists are Jews, many are Christians from all branches of the faith. So why don't you just use the words you use in private when you are posting about the Jews.........................

 

[Phoenall]

Firstly, native Palestinians are both Muslim, Christian and Jewish faiths. (While only 1% or 2% of the population there were Palestinian Arab Jews prior to the European Jewish invasion). Your attempt at making Palestine an Islam versus Judaism issue is a non-starter.

Taken down to basics Nazism had four basic tenants:

1. nationalism
2, anti-communism
3. traditionalism
4. ethnostatism (Aryan/German suoeriority and exclusiveness.)

If one removes anti-communism from the equation. Nazism is perfectly in line with Zionism.

More interestingly, and as people are increasingly coming to understand, Hitler’s primary animus was not against Jews as such, but Bolshevism, which indeed was largely Jewish endeavor.

By the way claiming dullness of those that have forgotten more than you will ever learn is hilarious. But carry on, you provide entertainment.

They could not be Palestinian arab Jews as that would be against Islamic law, just as Palestinian arab Christians are also against the law and they would have been executed for apostacy. They were non arab Christians and Jews that lived in Palestine, but only the Jews had any longevity of tenure. The muslims over the last 1400 years had kept the population of non muslims down by simply mass murdering whole towns and villages and taking over, that is why the Jews and Christians were in such small numbers.

Your list of attributes defines Catholicism and islam perfectly with nothing taken out to meet with your warped POV.
And you are wrong again regarding Bolshevism as that was mainly Catholics who had become disenfranchised

 

[Phoenall]

You are just parroting Zionist propaganda that we have seen parroted for quite a long time. You are a propagandist, you are transparent, not uncommon among ZioNazis.The Palestinian people described themselves as such before the European Jews described themselves as Israelis. The Palestinians called themselves Palestinians in 1922 when the European Jews described themselves as Zionists. You are a fraud.


Correspondence With the Palestine Arab Delegation and the Zionist Organisation, 1922
Command 1700
(From: http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/9a...48a7e5584ee1403485256cd8006c3fbe!OpenDocument)
United Kingdom
1 July 1922
PALESTINE.
CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION.
Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
JUNE, 1922.
LONDON:
PUBLISHED BY HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE.
To be purchased directly from H.M. STATIONERY OFFICE, at the following address:
Adastra House, Kingsway, London, W.C. 2; 120, George Street, Edinburgh:
York Street, Manchester; 1, St. Andre's Crescent, Cardiff;
15, Donegall Square West, Belfast; or through any Bookseller
1922.
[Reprinted 1929]
Price 1s. 0d. net.
[Cmd. 1700.]
PALESTINE.
CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB
DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION.No. 1.
The Palestine Arab Delegation to the Secretary of State for the Colonies.
HOTEL CECIL,
London, W.C.,
February 21st, 1922.

Sir,
We wish to express our thanks to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for his courtesy in allowing us to see the draft of a proposed Palestine Order in Council embodying a scheme of Government for Palestine, and to discuss the same in our capacity of representatives of the Arab People of Palestine.

We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—

Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving the People of Palestine full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.


CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION. 1922

And once again by posting this you show that the arab muslims were only concerned with ruling all of the M.E. and having the Jews and Christians as unwilling slaves.

 

[Phoenall]

Just proves that there were Christian and Muslims Palestinians before there were Jew Israelis. Archival documentation trumps your bullshit.

So if that is the case does it mean that the koran being archival over-rules your modern documentation when it says that the Jews lived in the area first and that they are the true rulers of the land.

 

[Hollie]

Just proves that there were Christian and Muslims Palestinians before there were Jew Israelis. Archival documentation trumps your bullshit.

Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians. Secondly, can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

What's interesting is that your archival cut and paste actually refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine. But then, no one ever accused cut and pasters of actually making a defendable position.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Firstly, native Palestinians are both Muslim, Christian and Jewish faiths. (While only 1% or 2% of the population there were Palestinian Arab Jews prior to the European Jewish invasion). Your attempt at making Palestine an Islam versus Judaism issue is a non-starter.

Taken down to basics Nazism had four basic tenants:

1. nationalism
2, anti-communism
3. traditionalism
4. ethnostatism (Aryan/German suoeriority and exclusiveness.)

If one removes anti-communism from the equation. Nazism is perfectly in line with Zionism.

More interestingly, and as people are increasingly coming to understand, Hitler’s primary animus was not against Jews as such, but Bolshevism, which indeed was largely Jewish endeavor.

By the way claiming dullness of those that have forgotten more than you will ever learn is hilarious. But carry on, you provide entertainment.

Firstly, "Pal'istanian" as a national identity was a late 1960's invention of Yassir Arafat. You might want to understand the terms you are using to avoid confounding your attempt at argument. Secondly, as I described it, Nazi ideology is closely parallel to islamo-supremacy because both use fascism and appeals to religious fundamentalism as elements to further their respective doctrines. Interestingly, your Joooooo fascination causes you some rather strange interpretations of history but that's not uncommon for Muhammedans. While you're hoping to unlink the common themes that historically connect Nazi fascism and islamo-supremacist ideals, you ignore the root cause of islamo-fascism.

Firstly, "Pal'istanian" as a national identity was a late 1960's invention of Yassir Arafat.​

Do you have a link to that?

 

[montelatici]

Just proves that there were Christian and Muslims Palestinians before there were Jew Israelis. Archival documentation trumps your bullshit.

Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians. Secondly, can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

What's interesting is that your archival cut and paste actually refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine. But then, no one ever accused cut and pasters of actually making a defendable position.

As usual, source documentation trumps your propaganda that has no basis in fact. You are just a bullshitter.

Providing backup and links to the backup is a requirement on this forum. While I don't report those, such as yourself, that do not provide text and links supporting an assertion, I have been reported for not doing so and have been directed to provide said backup. Your habit of just blurting nonsense without any backup is not kosher, pardon the pun. I am surprised you are not aware of this.

To your questions and incorrect assertions.

1. Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians

Wrong. It clearly mentions the Christians.

"The Colonial Office to the Palestine Arab Delegation.
DOWNING STREET,
1st March, 1922.

SIR,

I am directed by Mr. Secretary Churchill to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 21st February on the subject of the draft Orders in Council providing for the Constitution of Palestine. Mr. Churchill has carefully considered this letter and has instructed me to offer the following observations upon it: —

2. I am to point out in the first place that, while your Delegation is recognised by Mr. Churchill as representing a large section of the Moslem and Christian inhabitants of Palestine...."

CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION. 1922


2. Can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

Of course.

Musa Kazim was the head of the Palestinian (Muslim-Christian Association) Congress and the chief of the Palestinian Delegation to London the correspondence is related to. He had been dismissed earlier as Mayor of Jerusalem by the British because he attended an anti-British Palestinian independence demonstration.

"The fourth congress, on 25 June 1921, was attended by about 100 delegates who voted to send a six-man delegation (led by Musa Kazim) to London. The delegates arrived in London in September and met with the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Winston Churchill. On their way, they met Pope Benedict XV in Vatican City and attempted to meet with delegates to theLeague of Nations in Geneva. Responding to the congress, High Commissioner Herbert Samuel promised that the British would "never impose a policy contrary to their religions, their political and their economic interests".[16][17][18]"

Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


3. refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine


Quite the contrary. The "cut and paste" as you call source documentation from official archives, confirms that the Palestinians were forcefully demanding their independence from Britain from the outset of the Mandate and that the British illegally, using an previous agreement (Balfour Declaration) withheld that independence.

Illegally because the British, when they signed the Covenant of the League of Nations, they agreed to Article 20 of the Covenant which required that previous agreements (such as the Balfour Declaration) which were inconsistent with the Covenant be abrogated. The Balfour Declaration being inconsistent with Article 22 which proclaimed that the people in the former colonies of the Axis powers would be groomed for independence. Of course, the British had no intention of abiding with Article 22 and no intention of granting independence to the people of Palestine. The British intended to transfer a European population to a land under their occupation.

ARTICLE 20.
The Members of the League severally agree that this Covenant is accepted as abrogating all obligations or understandings inter se which are inconsistent with the terms thereof, and solemnly undertake that they will not hereafter enter into any engagements inconsistent with the terms thereof.

In case any Member of the League shall, before becoming a Member of the League, have undertaken any obligations inconsistent with the terms of this Covenant, it shall be the duty of such Member to take immediate steps to procure its release from such obligations.

Now, having been suitably humiliated, I hope you will finally realize that you are totally inadequate in terms of knowledge regarding the historical context, and not the sharpest knife in the drawer, even if you had a minimal grasp of the historical background to debate this with me.

Having never researched the historical record via source documentation from academic and governmental archives and having only absorbed Zionist propaganda from Zionist sources puts you at a serious disadvantage.

 

[MJB12741]

Well let's see now. What do we all know for indesputable fact? We know the Jews were in the land since early antiquity. We know that Jews were indigenous Palestinians. We also know there were no Christians until after the life of Jesus. And there were no Muslims at all until after the 7th century AD. And according to Monte, "there were Christian & Muslim Palestinians before there were Jew Israelis." Hey Monte, for your education. Call it Israel or Palestine, the land is still the same dopey. But thanks so much for all the laughs you give us.

 

[montelatici]

Well MJB there was a political party in the U.S. called the "Know Nothing" Party. Your ancestors were probably founding members and it has rubbed off on you.

Let's get some things straight so we can get you playing with a full deck. You are at a total disadvantage because you just haven't the academic background and either won't or cannot do some simple research beyond the propaganda you have adopted.

1. The Zionists were Europeans that practiced Judaism they invaded Palestine they were not from Palestine. They were Europeans and lived in Europe and so did any of their ancestors that can be identified.

2. When the Zionists began their invasion there were a handful of Arabs that practiced Judaism in Palestine. They spoke Arabic, ate arabic food and were of the Arab culture. They were not Europeans They were Arab Jews. Arab is a cultural and linguistic designation not religious and not even ethnic. Here is some background on Arab Jews. Expand your horizons. LOL

Reflections By An Arab Jew - Ella Shohat

3. The people of Palestine have practiced many religions over time. They practiced Samaritanism, worshipped Baal, practiced Zoroastrianism, practiced Judaism, worshipped the Roman Gods, practiced the Christian and Muslim faiths and probably others. The religion practiced doesn't change the people. The Muslim Palestinians today were probably exclusively Christian before the fall of the Byzantines in Jerusalem. And ancestors of those same Christians worshipped the Roman Gods before the Empire made Christianity the state religion.

 

[Hollie]

Just proves that there were Christian and Muslims Palestinians before there were Jew Israelis. Archival documentation trumps your bullshit.

Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians. Secondly, can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

What's interesting is that your archival cut and paste actually refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine. But then, no one ever accused cut and pasters of actually making a defendable position.

As usual, source documentation trumps your propaganda that has no basis in fact. You are just a bullshitter.

Providing backup and links to the backup is a requirement on this forum. While I don't report those, such as yourself, that do not provide text and links supporting an assertion, I have been reported for not doing so and have been directed to provide said backup. Your habit of just blurting nonsense without any backup is not kosher, pardon the pun. I am surprised you are not aware of this.

To your questions and incorrect assertions.

1. Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians

Wrong. It clearly mentions the Christians.

"The Colonial Office to the Palestine Arab Delegation.
DOWNING STREET,
1st March, 1922.

SIR,

I am directed by Mr. Secretary Churchill to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 21st February on the subject of the draft Orders in Council providing for the Constitution of Palestine. Mr. Churchill has carefully considered this letter and has instructed me to offer the following observations upon it: —

2. I am to point out in the first place that, while your Delegation is recognised by Mr. Churchill as representing a large section of the Moslem and Christian inhabitants of Palestine...."

CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION. 1922


2. Can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

Of course.

Musa Kazim was the head of the Palestinian (Muslim-Christian Association) Congress and the chief of the Palestinian Delegation to London the correspondence is related to. He had been dismissed earlier as Mayor of Jerusalem by the British because he attended an anti-British Palestinian independence demonstration.

"The fourth congress, on 25 June 1921, was attended by about 100 delegates who voted to send a six-man delegation (led by Musa Kazim) to London. The delegates arrived in London in September and met with the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Winston Churchill. On their way, they met Pope Benedict XV in Vatican City and attempted to meet with delegates to theLeague of Nations in Geneva. Responding to the congress, High Commissioner Herbert Samuel promised that the British would "never impose a policy contrary to their religions, their political and their economic interests".[16][17][18]"

Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


3. refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine


Quite the contrary. The "cut and paste" as you call source documentation from official archives, confirms that the Palestinians were forcefully demanding their independence from Britain from the outset of the Mandate and that the British illegally, using an previous agreement (Balfour Declaration) withheld that independence.

Illegally because the British, when they signed the Covenant of the League of Nations, they agreed to Article 20 of the Covenant which required that previous agreements (such as the Balfour Declaration) which were inconsistent with the Covenant be abrogated. The Balfour Declaration being inconsistent with Article 22 which proclaimed that the people in the former colonies of the Axis powers would be groomed for independence. Of course, the British had no intention of abiding with Article 22 and no intention of granting independence to the people of Palestine. The British intended to transfer a European population to a land under their occupation.

ARTICLE 20.
The Members of the League severally agree that this Covenant is accepted as abrogating all obligations or understandings inter se which are inconsistent with the terms thereof, and solemnly undertake that they will not hereafter enter into any engagements inconsistent with the terms thereof.

In case any Member of the League shall, before becoming a Member of the League, have undertaken any obligations inconsistent with the terms of this Covenant, it shall be the duty of such Member to take immediate steps to procure its release from such obligations.

Now, having been suitably humiliated, I hope you will finally realize that you are totally inadequate in terms of knowledge regarding the historical context, and not the sharpest knife in the drawer, even if you had a minimal grasp of the historical background to debate this with me.

Having never researched the historical record via source documentation from academic and governmental archives and having only absorbed Zionist propaganda from Zionist sources puts you at a serious disadvantage.

Well MJB there was a political party in the U.S. called the "Know Nothing" Party. Your ancestors were probably founding members and it has rubbed off on you.

Let's get some things straight so we can get you playing with a full deck. You are at a total disadvantage because you just haven't the academic background and either won't or cannot do some simple research beyond the propaganda you have adopted.

1. The Zionists were Europeans that practiced Judaism they invaded Palestine they were not from Palestine. They were Europeans and lived in Europe and so did any of their ancestors that can be identified.

2. When the Zionists began their invasion there were a handful of Arabs that practiced Judaism in Palestine. They spoke Arabic, ate arabic food and were of the Arab culture. They were not Europeans They were Arab Jews. Arab is a cultural and linguistic designation not religious and not even ethnic. Here is some background on Arab Jews. Expand your horizons. LOL

Reflections By An Arab Jew - Ella Shohat

3. The people of Palestine have practiced many religions over time. They practiced Samaritanism, worshipped Baal, practiced Zoroastrianism, practiced Judaism, worshipped the Roman Gods, practiced the Christian and Muslim faiths and probably others. The religion practiced doesn't change the people. The Muslim Palestinians today were probably exclusively Christian before the fall of the Byzantines in Jerusalem. And ancestors of those same Christians worshipped the Roman Gods before the Empire made Christianity the state religion.

As usual, cutting and pasting (and your silly teenage bravado), was intended only to sidestep your inability to address the issue you have attempted to sidestep previously.

Define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

 

[montelatici]

Just proves that there were Christian and Muslims Palestinians before there were Jew Israelis. Archival documentation trumps your bullshit.

Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians. Secondly, can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

What's interesting is that your archival cut and paste actually refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine. But then, no one ever accused cut and pasters of actually making a defendable position.

As usual, source documentation trumps your propaganda that has no basis in fact. You are just a bullshitter.

Providing backup and links to the backup is a requirement on this forum. While I don't report those, such as yourself, that do not provide text and links supporting an assertion, I have been reported for not doing so and have been directed to provide said backup. Your habit of just blurting nonsense without any backup is not kosher, pardon the pun. I am surprised you are not aware of this.

To your questions and incorrect assertions.

1. Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians

Wrong. It clearly mentions the Christians.

"The Colonial Office to the Palestine Arab Delegation.
DOWNING STREET,
1st March, 1922.

SIR,

I am directed by Mr. Secretary Churchill to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 21st February on the subject of the draft Orders in Council providing for the Constitution of Palestine. Mr. Churchill has carefully considered this letter and has instructed me to offer the following observations upon it: —

2. I am to point out in the first place that, while your Delegation is recognised by Mr. Churchill as representing a large section of the Moslem and Christian inhabitants of Palestine...."

CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION. 1922


2. Can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

Of course.

Musa Kazim was the head of the Palestinian (Muslim-Christian Association) Congress and the chief of the Palestinian Delegation to London the correspondence is related to. He had been dismissed earlier as Mayor of Jerusalem by the British because he attended an anti-British Palestinian independence demonstration.

"The fourth congress, on 25 June 1921, was attended by about 100 delegates who voted to send a six-man delegation (led by Musa Kazim) to London. The delegates arrived in London in September and met with the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Winston Churchill. On their way, they met Pope Benedict XV in Vatican City and attempted to meet with delegates to theLeague of Nations in Geneva. Responding to the congress, High Commissioner Herbert Samuel promised that the British would "never impose a policy contrary to their religions, their political and their economic interests".[16][17][18]"

Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


3. refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine


Quite the contrary. The "cut and paste" as you call source documentation from official archives, confirms that the Palestinians were forcefully demanding their independence from Britain from the outset of the Mandate and that the British illegally, using an previous agreement (Balfour Declaration) withheld that independence.

Illegally because the British, when they signed the Covenant of the League of Nations, they agreed to Article 20 of the Covenant which required that previous agreements (such as the Balfour Declaration) which were inconsistent with the Covenant be abrogated. The Balfour Declaration being inconsistent with Article 22 which proclaimed that the people in the former colonies of the Axis powers would be groomed for independence. Of course, the British had no intention of abiding with Article 22 and no intention of granting independence to the people of Palestine. The British intended to transfer a European population to a land under their occupation.

ARTICLE 20.
The Members of the League severally agree that this Covenant is accepted as abrogating all obligations or understandings inter se which are inconsistent with the terms thereof, and solemnly undertake that they will not hereafter enter into any engagements inconsistent with the terms thereof.

In case any Member of the League shall, before becoming a Member of the League, have undertaken any obligations inconsistent with the terms of this Covenant, it shall be the duty of such Member to take immediate steps to procure its release from such obligations.

Now, having been suitably humiliated, I hope you will finally realize that you are totally inadequate in terms of knowledge regarding the historical context, and not the sharpest knife in the drawer, even if you had a minimal grasp of the historical background to debate this with me.

Having never researched the historical record via source documentation from academic and governmental archives and having only absorbed Zionist propaganda from Zionist sources puts you at a serious disadvantage.

Well MJB there was a political party in the U.S. called the "Know Nothing" Party. Your ancestors were probably founding members and it has rubbed off on you.

Let's get some things straight so we can get you playing with a full deck. You are at a total disadvantage because you just haven't the academic background and either won't or cannot do some simple research beyond the propaganda you have adopted.

1. The Zionists were Europeans that practiced Judaism they invaded Palestine they were not from Palestine. They were Europeans and lived in Europe and so did any of their ancestors that can be identified.

2. When the Zionists began their invasion there were a handful of Arabs that practiced Judaism in Palestine. They spoke Arabic, ate arabic food and were of the Arab culture. They were not Europeans They were Arab Jews. Arab is a cultural and linguistic designation not religious and not even ethnic. Here is some background on Arab Jews. Expand your horizons. LOL

Reflections By An Arab Jew - Ella Shohat

3. The people of Palestine have practiced many religions over time. They practiced Samaritanism, worshipped Baal, practiced Zoroastrianism, practiced Judaism, worshipped the Roman Gods, practiced the Christian and Muslim faiths and probably others. The religion practiced doesn't change the people. The Muslim Palestinians today were probably exclusively Christian before the fall of the Byzantines in Jerusalem. And ancestors of those same Christians worshipped the Roman Gods before the Empire made Christianity the state religion.

As usual, cutting and pasting (and your silly teenage bravado), was intended only to sidestep your inability to address the issue you have attempted to sidestep previously.

Define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

You are slow, I already answered the question and provided an appropriate link. At the time of the correspondence in question, Musa Kazim had been elected president of the Palestinian National Arab Congress.

 

[MJB12741]

Well MJB there was a political party in the U.S. called the "Know Nothing" Party. Your ancestors were probably founding members and it has rubbed off on you.

Let's get some things straight so we can get you playing with a full deck. You are at a total disadvantage because you just haven't the academic background and either won't or cannot do some simple research beyond the propaganda you have adopted.

1. The Zionists were Europeans that practiced Judaism they invaded Palestine they were not from Palestine. They were Europeans and lived in Europe and so did any of their ancestors that can be identified.

2. When the Zionists began their invasion there were a handful of Arabs that practiced Judaism in Palestine. They spoke Arabic, ate arabic food and were of the Arab culture. They were not Europeans They were Arab Jews. Arab is a cultural and linguistic designation not religious and not even ethnic. Here is some background on Arab Jews. Expand your horizons. LOL

Reflections By An Arab Jew - Ella Shohat

3. The people of Palestine have practiced many religions over time. They practiced Samaritanism, worshipped Baal, practiced Zoroastrianism, practiced Judaism, worshipped the Roman Gods, practiced the Christian and Muslim faiths and probably others. The religion practiced doesn't change the people. The Muslim Palestinians today were probably exclusively Christian before the fall of the Byzantines in Jerusalem. And ancestors of those same Christians worshipped the Roman Gods before the Empire made Christianity the state religion.

Uh huh! So tell us more about how the Christian Palestinians became todays Muslim Palestinians? Also for your education, Israel was legally & ethically established as a country in 1948 as a home for the Jewish people by a vote of the member nations of the UN at that time. Therefore all Jews, European or otherwise, can become legal citizens if they so chose. Accept it & move on to something happy for you like Muslim terrorists killing us infidels all over the world.

 

[Phoenall]

Firstly, native Palestinians are both Muslim, Christian and Jewish faiths. (While only 1% or 2% of the population there were Palestinian Arab Jews prior to the European Jewish invasion). Your attempt at making Palestine an Islam versus Judaism issue is a non-starter.

Taken down to basics Nazism had four basic tenants:

1. nationalism
2, anti-communism
3. traditionalism
4. ethnostatism (Aryan/German suoeriority and exclusiveness.)

If one removes anti-communism from the equation. Nazism is perfectly in line with Zionism.

More interestingly, and as people are increasingly coming to understand, Hitler’s primary animus was not against Jews as such, but Bolshevism, which indeed was largely Jewish endeavor.

By the way claiming dullness of those that have forgotten more than you will ever learn is hilarious. But carry on, you provide entertainment.

Firstly, "Pal'istanian" as a national identity was a late 1960's invention of Yassir Arafat. You might want to understand the terms you are using to avoid confounding your attempt at argument. Secondly, as I described it, Nazi ideology is closely parallel to islamo-supremacy because both use fascism and appeals to religious fundamentalism as elements to further their respective doctrines. Interestingly, your Joooooo fascination causes you some rather strange interpretations of history but that's not uncommon for Muhammedans. While you're hoping to unlink the common themes that historically connect Nazi fascism and islamo-supremacist ideals, you ignore the root cause of islamo-fascism.

Firstly, "Pal'istanian" as a national identity was a late 1960's invention of Yassir Arafat.​

Do you have a link to that?

YES




The Arab immigrants that started to call themselves (in the 1960's as) "Palestinians"



The Arabs in the Holy Land - Natives or Aliens?

In 1937, the Arab leader Auni Bey Abdul Hadi told the Peel Commission: "There is no such country as Palestine. Palestine is a term the Zionists invented. Palestine is alien to us."

In 1946, Princeton's Arab professor of Middle East history, Philip Hitti, told the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry: "It's common knowledge, there is no such thing as Palestine in history."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, an executive member of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), said in an interview to the Dutch newspaper Trouw: "The 'Palestinian people' does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel."

 

[Phoenall]

Well MJB there was a political party in the U.S. called the "Know Nothing" Party. Your ancestors were probably founding members and it has rubbed off on you.

Let's get some things straight so we can get you playing with a full deck. You are at a total disadvantage because you just haven't the academic background and either won't or cannot do some simple research beyond the propaganda you have adopted.

1. The Zionists were Europeans that practiced Judaism they invaded Palestine they were not from Palestine. They were Europeans and lived in Europe and so did any of their ancestors that can be identified.

2. When the Zionists began their invasion there were a handful of Arabs that practiced Judaism in Palestine. They spoke Arabic, ate arabic food and were of the Arab culture. They were not Europeans They were Arab Jews. Arab is a cultural and linguistic designation not religious and not even ethnic. Here is some background on Arab Jews. Expand your horizons. LOL

Reflections By An Arab Jew - Ella Shohat

3. The people of Palestine have practiced many religions over time. They practiced Samaritanism, worshipped Baal, practiced Zoroastrianism, practiced Judaism, worshipped the Roman Gods, practiced the Christian and Muslim faiths and probably others. The religion practiced doesn't change the people. The Muslim Palestinians today were probably exclusively Christian before the fall of the Byzantines in Jerusalem. And ancestors of those same Christians worshipped the Roman Gods before the Empire made Christianity the state religion.

Does that include the Cohens that are buried beneath the sands of Palestine that died before the birth of Christ, because some of the European Jews have very close matches to the DNA of those Cohens.

 

[Phoenall]

Just proves that there were Christian and Muslims Palestinians before there were Jew Israelis. Archival documentation trumps your bullshit.

Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians. Secondly, can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

What's interesting is that your archival cut and paste actually refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine. But then, no one ever accused cut and pasters of actually making a defendable position.

As usual, source documentation trumps your propaganda that has no basis in fact. You are just a bullshitter.

Providing backup and links to the backup is a requirement on this forum. While I don't report those, such as yourself, that do not provide text and links supporting an assertion, I have been reported for not doing so and have been directed to provide said backup. Your habit of just blurting nonsense without any backup is not kosher, pardon the pun. I am surprised you are not aware of this.

To your questions and incorrect assertions.

1. Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians

Wrong. It clearly mentions the Christians.

"The Colonial Office to the Palestine Arab Delegation.
DOWNING STREET,
1st March, 1922.

SIR,

I am directed by Mr. Secretary Churchill to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 21st February on the subject of the draft Orders in Council providing for the Constitution of Palestine. Mr. Churchill has carefully considered this letter and has instructed me to offer the following observations upon it: —

2. I am to point out in the first place that, while your Delegation is recognised by Mr. Churchill as representing a large section of the Moslem and Christian inhabitants of Palestine...."

CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION. 1922


2. Can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

Of course.

Musa Kazim was the head of the Palestinian (Muslim-Christian Association) Congress and the chief of the Palestinian Delegation to London the correspondence is related to. He had been dismissed earlier as Mayor of Jerusalem by the British because he attended an anti-British Palestinian independence demonstration.

"The fourth congress, on 25 June 1921, was attended by about 100 delegates who voted to send a six-man delegation (led by Musa Kazim) to London. The delegates arrived in London in September and met with the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Winston Churchill. On their way, they met Pope Benedict XV in Vatican City and attempted to meet with delegates to theLeague of Nations in Geneva. Responding to the congress, High Commissioner Herbert Samuel promised that the British would "never impose a policy contrary to their religions, their political and their economic interests".[16][17][18]"

Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


3. refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine


Quite the contrary. The "cut and paste" as you call source documentation from official archives, confirms that the Palestinians were forcefully demanding their independence from Britain from the outset of the Mandate and that the British illegally, using an previous agreement (Balfour Declaration) withheld that independence.

Illegally because the British, when they signed the Covenant of the League of Nations, they agreed to Article 20 of the Covenant which required that previous agreements (such as the Balfour Declaration) which were inconsistent with the Covenant be abrogated. The Balfour Declaration being inconsistent with Article 22 which proclaimed that the people in the former colonies of the Axis powers would be groomed for independence. Of course, the British had no intention of abiding with Article 22 and no intention of granting independence to the people of Palestine. The British intended to transfer a European population to a land under their occupation.

ARTICLE 20.
The Members of the League severally agree that this Covenant is accepted as abrogating all obligations or understandings inter se which are inconsistent with the terms thereof, and solemnly undertake that they will not hereafter enter into any engagements inconsistent with the terms thereof.

In case any Member of the League shall, before becoming a Member of the League, have undertaken any obligations inconsistent with the terms of this Covenant, it shall be the duty of such Member to take immediate steps to procure its release from such obligations.

Now, having been suitably humiliated, I hope you will finally realize that you are totally inadequate in terms of knowledge regarding the historical context, and not the sharpest knife in the drawer, even if you had a minimal grasp of the historical background to debate this with me.

Having never researched the historical record via source documentation from academic and governmental archives and having only absorbed Zionist propaganda from Zionist sources puts you at a serious disadvantage.

Well MJB there was a political party in the U.S. called the "Know Nothing" Party. Your ancestors were probably founding members and it has rubbed off on you.

Let's get some things straight so we can get you playing with a full deck. You are at a total disadvantage because you just haven't the academic background and either won't or cannot do some simple research beyond the propaganda you have adopted.

1. The Zionists were Europeans that practiced Judaism they invaded Palestine they were not from Palestine. They were Europeans and lived in Europe and so did any of their ancestors that can be identified.

2. When the Zionists began their invasion there were a handful of Arabs that practiced Judaism in Palestine. They spoke Arabic, ate arabic food and were of the Arab culture. They were not Europeans They were Arab Jews. Arab is a cultural and linguistic designation not religious and not even ethnic. Here is some background on Arab Jews. Expand your horizons. LOL

Reflections By An Arab Jew - Ella Shohat

3. The people of Palestine have practiced many religions over time. They practiced Samaritanism, worshipped Baal, practiced Zoroastrianism, practiced Judaism, worshipped the Roman Gods, practiced the Christian and Muslim faiths and probably others. The religion practiced doesn't change the people. The Muslim Palestinians today were probably exclusively Christian before the fall of the Byzantines in Jerusalem. And ancestors of those same Christians worshipped the Roman Gods before the Empire made Christianity the state religion.

As usual, cutting and pasting (and your silly teenage bravado), was intended only to sidestep your inability to address the issue you have attempted to sidestep previously.

Define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

You are slow, I already answered the question and provided an appropriate link. At the time of the correspondence in question, Musa Kazim had been elected president of the Palestinian National Arab Congress.

By who, which Jewish Palestinian was asked if they accepted him as their leader and commander in chief. Or was he elected by other arab muslims from outside of Palestine to be the mouth piece for the arab league, or pan arab nationalists as they were better known at that time. For a condensed version of his life read here



Musa al-Husayni - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[montelatici]

Well MJB there was a political party in the U.S. called the "Know Nothing" Party. Your ancestors were probably founding members and it has rubbed off on you.

Let's get some things straight so we can get you playing with a full deck. You are at a total disadvantage because you just haven't the academic background and either won't or cannot do some simple research beyond the propaganda you have adopted.

1. The Zionists were Europeans that practiced Judaism they invaded Palestine they were not from Palestine. They were Europeans and lived in Europe and so did any of their ancestors that can be identified.

2. When the Zionists began their invasion there were a handful of Arabs that practiced Judaism in Palestine. They spoke Arabic, ate arabic food and were of the Arab culture. They were not Europeans They were Arab Jews. Arab is a cultural and linguistic designation not religious and not even ethnic. Here is some background on Arab Jews. Expand your horizons. LOL

Reflections By An Arab Jew - Ella Shohat

3. The people of Palestine have practiced many religions over time. They practiced Samaritanism, worshipped Baal, practiced Zoroastrianism, practiced Judaism, worshipped the Roman Gods, practiced the Christian and Muslim faiths and probably others. The religion practiced doesn't change the people. The Muslim Palestinians today were probably exclusively Christian before the fall of the Byzantines in Jerusalem. And ancestors of those same Christians worshipped the Roman Gods before the Empire made Christianity the state religion.

Uh huh! So tell us more about how the Christian Palestinians became todays Muslim Palestinians? Also for your education, Israel was legally & ethically established as a country in 1948 as a home for the Jewish people by a vote of the member nations of the UN at that time. Therefore all Jews, European or otherwise, can become legal citizens if they so chose. Accept it & move on to something happy for you like Muslim terrorists killing us infidels all over the world.

No problem providing you an education. Maybe you will realize how simplistic your thought processes are with respect to historical fact

Byzantine (Christian) Jerusalem/Palestine was conquered by the Sassanids in 614 AD, who were Zoroastrians. It is said that the Sassanids killed every Christian in Jerusalem (90,000) so not many would have converted. The Christians (Byzantines) defeated the Sassanids in 628 and retook Jerusalem. It is assumed it was repopulated with Byzantine Christians but no one knows the number. However, the Arabs then defeated the Byzantines in 637 and took the city and Palestine from the Byzantines. The population of Christians did not immediately convert to Islam as it required military service, but over the centuries, before the Crusaders (Christians) retook the city in 1099, Christians had mostly converted to Islam. The Crusaders had all Muslims killed when they took the city and presumably the population became majority Christian during Christian rule of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem.

Israel may have been established, but certainly not ethically. Half the native population was either killed or evicted, nothing ethical about that.

 

[Hollie]

Just proves that there were Christian and Muslims Palestinians before there were Jew Israelis. Archival documentation trumps your bullshit.

Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians. Secondly, can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

What's interesting is that your archival cut and paste actually refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine. But then, no one ever accused cut and pasters of actually making a defendable position.

As usual, source documentation trumps your propaganda that has no basis in fact. You are just a bullshitter.

Providing backup and links to the backup is a requirement on this forum. While I don't report those, such as yourself, that do not provide text and links supporting an assertion, I have been reported for not doing so and have been directed to provide said backup. Your habit of just blurting nonsense without any backup is not kosher, pardon the pun. I am surprised you are not aware of this.

To your questions and incorrect assertions.

1. Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians

Wrong. It clearly mentions the Christians.

"The Colonial Office to the Palestine Arab Delegation.
DOWNING STREET,
1st March, 1922.

SIR,

I am directed by Mr. Secretary Churchill to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 21st February on the subject of the draft Orders in Council providing for the Constitution of Palestine. Mr. Churchill has carefully considered this letter and has instructed me to offer the following observations upon it: —

2. I am to point out in the first place that, while your Delegation is recognised by Mr. Churchill as representing a large section of the Moslem and Christian inhabitants of Palestine...."

CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION. 1922


2. Can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

Of course.

Musa Kazim was the head of the Palestinian (Muslim-Christian Association) Congress and the chief of the Palestinian Delegation to London the correspondence is related to. He had been dismissed earlier as Mayor of Jerusalem by the British because he attended an anti-British Palestinian independence demonstration.

"The fourth congress, on 25 June 1921, was attended by about 100 delegates who voted to send a six-man delegation (led by Musa Kazim) to London. The delegates arrived in London in September and met with the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Winston Churchill. On their way, they met Pope Benedict XV in Vatican City and attempted to meet with delegates to theLeague of Nations in Geneva. Responding to the congress, High Commissioner Herbert Samuel promised that the British would "never impose a policy contrary to their religions, their political and their economic interests".[16][17][18]"

Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


3. refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine


Quite the contrary. The "cut and paste" as you call source documentation from official archives, confirms that the Palestinians were forcefully demanding their independence from Britain from the outset of the Mandate and that the British illegally, using an previous agreement (Balfour Declaration) withheld that independence.

Illegally because the British, when they signed the Covenant of the League of Nations, they agreed to Article 20 of the Covenant which required that previous agreements (such as the Balfour Declaration) which were inconsistent with the Covenant be abrogated. The Balfour Declaration being inconsistent with Article 22 which proclaimed that the people in the former colonies of the Axis powers would be groomed for independence. Of course, the British had no intention of abiding with Article 22 and no intention of granting independence to the people of Palestine. The British intended to transfer a European population to a land under their occupation.

ARTICLE 20.
The Members of the League severally agree that this Covenant is accepted as abrogating all obligations or understandings inter se which are inconsistent with the terms thereof, and solemnly undertake that they will not hereafter enter into any engagements inconsistent with the terms thereof.

In case any Member of the League shall, before becoming a Member of the League, have undertaken any obligations inconsistent with the terms of this Covenant, it shall be the duty of such Member to take immediate steps to procure its release from such obligations.

Now, having been suitably humiliated, I hope you will finally realize that you are totally inadequate in terms of knowledge regarding the historical context, and not the sharpest knife in the drawer, even if you had a minimal grasp of the historical background to debate this with me.

Having never researched the historical record via source documentation from academic and governmental archives and having only absorbed Zionist propaganda from Zionist sources puts you at a serious disadvantage.

Well MJB there was a political party in the U.S. called the "Know Nothing" Party. Your ancestors were probably founding members and it has rubbed off on you.

Let's get some things straight so we can get you playing with a full deck. You are at a total disadvantage because you just haven't the academic background and either won't or cannot do some simple research beyond the propaganda you have adopted.

1. The Zionists were Europeans that practiced Judaism they invaded Palestine they were not from Palestine. They were Europeans and lived in Europe and so did any of their ancestors that can be identified.

2. When the Zionists began their invasion there were a handful of Arabs that practiced Judaism in Palestine. They spoke Arabic, ate arabic food and were of the Arab culture. They were not Europeans They were Arab Jews. Arab is a cultural and linguistic designation not religious and not even ethnic. Here is some background on Arab Jews. Expand your horizons. LOL

Reflections By An Arab Jew - Ella Shohat

3. The people of Palestine have practiced many religions over time. They practiced Samaritanism, worshipped Baal, practiced Zoroastrianism, practiced Judaism, worshipped the Roman Gods, practiced the Christian and Muslim faiths and probably others. The religion practiced doesn't change the people. The Muslim Palestinians today were probably exclusively Christian before the fall of the Byzantines in Jerusalem. And ancestors of those same Christians worshipped the Roman Gods before the Empire made Christianity the state religion.

As usual, cutting and pasting (and your silly teenage bravado), was intended only to sidestep your inability to address the issue you have attempted to sidestep previously.

Define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

You are slow, I already answered the question and provided an appropriate link. At the time of the correspondence in question, Musa Kazim had been elected president of the Palestinian National Arab Congress.

Just proves that there were Christian and Muslims Palestinians before there were Jew Israelis. Archival documentation trumps your bullshit.

Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians. Secondly, can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

What's interesting is that your archival cut and paste actually refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine. But then, no one ever accused cut and pasters of actually making a defendable position.

As usual, source documentation trumps your propaganda that has no basis in fact. You are just a bullshitter.

Providing backup and links to the backup is a requirement on this forum. While I don't report those, such as yourself, that do not provide text and links supporting an assertion, I have been reported for not doing so and have been directed to provide said backup. Your habit of just blurting nonsense without any backup is not kosher, pardon the pun. I am surprised you are not aware of this.

To your questions and incorrect assertions.

1. Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians

Wrong. It clearly mentions the Christians.

"The Colonial Office to the Palestine Arab Delegation.
DOWNING STREET,
1st March, 1922.

SIR,

I am directed by Mr. Secretary Churchill to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 21st February on the subject of the draft Orders in Council providing for the Constitution of Palestine. Mr. Churchill has carefully considered this letter and has instructed me to offer the following observations upon it: —

2. I am to point out in the first place that, while your Delegation is recognised by Mr. Churchill as representing a large section of the Moslem and Christian inhabitants of Palestine...."

CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION. 1922


2. Can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

Of course.

Musa Kazim was the head of the Palestinian (Muslim-Christian Association) Congress and the chief of the Palestinian Delegation to London the correspondence is related to. He had been dismissed earlier as Mayor of Jerusalem by the British because he attended an anti-British Palestinian independence demonstration.

"The fourth congress, on 25 June 1921, was attended by about 100 delegates who voted to send a six-man delegation (led by Musa Kazim) to London. The delegates arrived in London in September and met with the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Winston Churchill. On their way, they met Pope Benedict XV in Vatican City and attempted to meet with delegates to theLeague of Nations in Geneva. Responding to the congress, High Commissioner Herbert Samuel promised that the British would "never impose a policy contrary to their religions, their political and their economic interests".[16][17][18]"

Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


3. refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine


Quite the contrary. The "cut and paste" as you call source documentation from official archives, confirms that the Palestinians were forcefully demanding their independence from Britain from the outset of the Mandate and that the British illegally, using an previous agreement (Balfour Declaration) withheld that independence.

Illegally because the British, when they signed the Covenant of the League of Nations, they agreed to Article 20 of the Covenant which required that previous agreements (such as the Balfour Declaration) which were inconsistent with the Covenant be abrogated. The Balfour Declaration being inconsistent with Article 22 which proclaimed that the people in the former colonies of the Axis powers would be groomed for independence. Of course, the British had no intention of abiding with Article 22 and no intention of granting independence to the people of Palestine. The British intended to transfer a European population to a land under their occupation.

ARTICLE 20.
The Members of the League severally agree that this Covenant is accepted as abrogating all obligations or understandings inter se which are inconsistent with the terms thereof, and solemnly undertake that they will not hereafter enter into any engagements inconsistent with the terms thereof.

In case any Member of the League shall, before becoming a Member of the League, have undertaken any obligations inconsistent with the terms of this Covenant, it shall be the duty of such Member to take immediate steps to procure its release from such obligations.

Now, having been suitably humiliated, I hope you will finally realize that you are totally inadequate in terms of knowledge regarding the historical context, and not the sharpest knife in the drawer, even if you had a minimal grasp of the historical background to debate this with me.

Having never researched the historical record via source documentation from academic and governmental archives and having only absorbed Zionist propaganda from Zionist sources puts you at a serious disadvantage.

Well MJB there was a political party in the U.S. called the "Know Nothing" Party. Your ancestors were probably founding members and it has rubbed off on you.

Let's get some things straight so we can get you playing with a full deck. You are at a total disadvantage because you just haven't the academic background and either won't or cannot do some simple research beyond the propaganda you have adopted.

1. The Zionists were Europeans that practiced Judaism they invaded Palestine they were not from Palestine. They were Europeans and lived in Europe and so did any of their ancestors that can be identified.

2. When the Zionists began their invasion there were a handful of Arabs that practiced Judaism in Palestine. They spoke Arabic, ate arabic food and were of the Arab culture. They were not Europeans They were Arab Jews. Arab is a cultural and linguistic designation not religious and not even ethnic. Here is some background on Arab Jews. Expand your horizons. LOL

Reflections By An Arab Jew - Ella Shohat

3. The people of Palestine have practiced many religions over time. They practiced Samaritanism, worshipped Baal, practiced Zoroastrianism, practiced Judaism, worshipped the Roman Gods, practiced the Christian and Muslim faiths and probably others. The religion practiced doesn't change the people. The Muslim Palestinians today were probably exclusively Christian before the fall of the Byzantines in Jerusalem. And ancestors of those same Christians worshipped the Roman Gods before the Empire made Christianity the state religion.

As usual, cutting and pasting (and your silly teenage bravado), was intended only to sidestep your inability to address the issue you have attempted to sidestep previously.

Define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

You are slow, I already answered the question and provided an appropriate link. At the time of the correspondence in question, Musa Kazim had been elected president of the Palestinian National Arab Congress.

Just proves that there were Christian and Muslims Palestinians before there were Jew Israelis. Archival documentation trumps your bullshit.

Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians. Secondly, can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

What's interesting is that your archival cut and paste actually refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine. But then, no one ever accused cut and pasters of actually making a defendable position.

As usual, source documentation trumps your propaganda that has no basis in fact. You are just a bullshitter.

Providing backup and links to the backup is a requirement on this forum. While I don't report those, such as yourself, that do not provide text and links supporting an assertion, I have been reported for not doing so and have been directed to provide said backup. Your habit of just blurting nonsense without any backup is not kosher, pardon the pun. I am surprised you are not aware of this.

To your questions and incorrect assertions.

1. Firstly, your cut and paste makes no mention of Christians

Wrong. It clearly mentions the Christians.

"The Colonial Office to the Palestine Arab Delegation.
DOWNING STREET,
1st March, 1922.

SIR,

I am directed by Mr. Secretary Churchill to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 21st February on the subject of the draft Orders in Council providing for the Constitution of Palestine. Mr. Churchill has carefully considered this letter and has instructed me to offer the following observations upon it: —

2. I am to point out in the first place that, while your Delegation is recognised by Mr. Churchill as representing a large section of the Moslem and Christian inhabitants of Palestine...."

CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION. 1922


2. Can you define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

Of course.

Musa Kazim was the head of the Palestinian (Muslim-Christian Association) Congress and the chief of the Palestinian Delegation to London the correspondence is related to. He had been dismissed earlier as Mayor of Jerusalem by the British because he attended an anti-British Palestinian independence demonstration.

"The fourth congress, on 25 June 1921, was attended by about 100 delegates who voted to send a six-man delegation (led by Musa Kazim) to London. The delegates arrived in London in September and met with the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Winston Churchill. On their way, they met Pope Benedict XV in Vatican City and attempted to meet with delegates to theLeague of Nations in Geneva. Responding to the congress, High Commissioner Herbert Samuel promised that the British would "never impose a policy contrary to their religions, their political and their economic interests".[16][17][18]"

Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


3. refutes your claim to an autonomous Palestine


Quite the contrary. The "cut and paste" as you call source documentation from official archives, confirms that the Palestinians were forcefully demanding their independence from Britain from the outset of the Mandate and that the British illegally, using an previous agreement (Balfour Declaration) withheld that independence.

Illegally because the British, when they signed the Covenant of the League of Nations, they agreed to Article 20 of the Covenant which required that previous agreements (such as the Balfour Declaration) which were inconsistent with the Covenant be abrogated. The Balfour Declaration being inconsistent with Article 22 which proclaimed that the people in the former colonies of the Axis powers would be groomed for independence. Of course, the British had no intention of abiding with Article 22 and no intention of granting independence to the people of Palestine. The British intended to transfer a European population to a land under their occupation.

ARTICLE 20.
The Members of the League severally agree that this Covenant is accepted as abrogating all obligations or understandings inter se which are inconsistent with the terms thereof, and solemnly undertake that they will not hereafter enter into any engagements inconsistent with the terms thereof.

In case any Member of the League shall, before becoming a Member of the League, have undertaken any obligations inconsistent with the terms of this Covenant, it shall be the duty of such Member to take immediate steps to procure its release from such obligations.

Now, having been suitably humiliated, I hope you will finally realize that you are totally inadequate in terms of knowledge regarding the historical context, and not the sharpest knife in the drawer, even if you had a minimal grasp of the historical background to debate this with me.

Having never researched the historical record via source documentation from academic and governmental archives and having only absorbed Zionist propaganda from Zionist sources puts you at a serious disadvantage.

Well MJB there was a political party in the U.S. called the "Know Nothing" Party. Your ancestors were probably founding members and it has rubbed off on you.

Let's get some things straight so we can get you playing with a full deck. You are at a total disadvantage because you just haven't the academic background and either won't or cannot do some simple research beyond the propaganda you have adopted.

1. The Zionists were Europeans that practiced Judaism they invaded Palestine they were not from Palestine. They were Europeans and lived in Europe and so did any of their ancestors that can be identified.

2. When the Zionists began their invasion there were a handful of Arabs that practiced Judaism in Palestine. They spoke Arabic, ate arabic food and were of the Arab culture. They were not Europeans They were Arab Jews. Arab is a cultural and linguistic designation not religious and not even ethnic. Here is some background on Arab Jews. Expand your horizons. LOL

Reflections By An Arab Jew - Ella Shohat

3. The people of Palestine have practiced many religions over time. They practiced Samaritanism, worshipped Baal, practiced Zoroastrianism, practiced Judaism, worshipped the Roman Gods, practiced the Christian and Muslim faiths and probably others. The religion practiced doesn't change the people. The Muslim Palestinians today were probably exclusively Christian before the fall of the Byzantines in Jerusalem. And ancestors of those same Christians worshipped the Roman Gods before the Empire made Christianity the state religion.

As usual, cutting and pasting (and your silly teenage bravado), was intended only to sidestep your inability to address the issue you have attempted to sidestep previously.

Define for us the Head-Turban-in-Charge, Emir, Ayatollah, Warlord or Sheik who controlled any functioning governing body over a place you call Palestine?

You are slow, I already answered the question and provided an appropriate link. At the time of the correspondence in question, Musa Kazim had been elected president of the Palestinian National Arab Congress.

Ya Allah, Habib. See, this is the danger faced by you cut and pasters' when you spend as much time as you do scouring wiki for material to dump into threads without understanding any of the underlying historical context.

As will eventually come to learn, there were at least a dozen "Arab congresses". None of which were in any way relevant as it was the British who administered civil authority. The so-called Arab congresses were little more than attempts by Arab Islamist fascists to subvert British administration.

 

[montelatici]

The Congress was elected on a yearly basis except during the war years of war or times of active rebellion. So yes there are a dozen at least. The Congresses were the native peoples government, much like the Continental Congresses of the U.S. during British rule. You would not say that the Continental Congresses were irrelevant because they were trying to subvert British administration, would you?

You are digging a deeper and deeper hole looking more and more the fool. You should give up while you are ahead. LOL

 

[Hollie]

The Congress was elected on a yearly basis except during the war years of war or times of active rebellion. So yes there are a dozen at least. The Congresses were the native peoples government, much like the Continental Congresses of the U.S. during British rule. You would not say that the Continental Congresses were irrelevant because they were trying to subvert British administration, would you?

You are digging a deeper and deeper hole looking more and more the fool. You should give up while you are ahead. LOL

Gee whiz, Habib, but you do have some some strange notions about the American revolution relative to islamist theocratic totalitarianism.

You will be interested to learn that the American revolution was about removing religious oppression at the hand of the Anglican Church. That's a bit different than arab imperialists seeking to install their brand of politico-religious fascism. At no time in islamist history has ther kuffar been considered equal to a muhammedan. That type of enforced fascism and apartheid, which typically define muhammedan societies were not a part of the process of the Continental Congress.

It's truly a shame that you are unable to make such distinctions about historical events. Perhaps if you spent time studying history rather that mindlessly copying and pasting from wiki, you would be better able to offer relevant commentary, LOL.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Firstly, native Palestinians are both Muslim, Christian and Jewish faiths. (While only 1% or 2% of the population there were Palestinian Arab Jews prior to the European Jewish invasion). Your attempt at making Palestine an Islam versus Judaism issue is a non-starter.

Taken down to basics Nazism had four basic tenants:

1. nationalism
2, anti-communism
3. traditionalism
4. ethnostatism (Aryan/German suoeriority and exclusiveness.)

If one removes anti-communism from the equation. Nazism is perfectly in line with Zionism.

More interestingly, and as people are increasingly coming to understand, Hitler’s primary animus was not against Jews as such, but Bolshevism, which indeed was largely Jewish endeavor.

By the way claiming dullness of those that have forgotten more than you will ever learn is hilarious. But carry on, you provide entertainment.

Firstly, "Pal'istanian" as a national identity was a late 1960's invention of Yassir Arafat. You might want to understand the terms you are using to avoid confounding your attempt at argument. Secondly, as I described it, Nazi ideology is closely parallel to islamo-supremacy because both use fascism and appeals to religious fundamentalism as elements to further their respective doctrines. Interestingly, your Joooooo fascination causes you some rather strange interpretations of history but that's not uncommon for Muhammedans. While you're hoping to unlink the common themes that historically connect Nazi fascism and islamo-supremacist ideals, you ignore the root cause of islamo-fascism.

Firstly, "Pal'istanian" as a national identity was a late 1960's invention of Yassir Arafat.​

Do you have a link to that?

YES




The Arab immigrants that started to call themselves (in the 1960's as) "Palestinians"



The Arabs in the Holy Land - Natives or Aliens?

In 1937, the Arab leader Auni Bey Abdul Hadi told the Peel Commission: "There is no such country as Palestine. Palestine is a term the Zionists invented. Palestine is alien to us."

In 1946, Princeton's Arab professor of Middle East history, Philip Hitti, told the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry: "It's common knowledge, there is no such thing as Palestine in history."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, an executive member of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), said in an interview to the Dutch newspaper Trouw: "The 'Palestinian people' does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel."

The Palestinian citizenship law of 1925 made all Palestinians citizens of Palestine. That is just an historical fact.