UN political chief criticizes Israel for new settlement plans

[Lissos]

I had and uncle in Palestine at the time in the British army so I would trust what he told me rather than the revised statements of Israeli apologists

As did I have a Grandfather who served in the British Army during the British Mandate Palestine, who died when I was about 12 and was not old enough to know much of anything about world affairs. Looking at his old service book, the dates written there show he served in the British Mandate during the years that would have been right in the midst of the Arab Revolt of 36-39.

Oh what I'd give to be able to chat to him now, but alas.

According to my father, my Grandfather was no fan of Arabs after that, and it must have come from experiences over there, right? Had he continued to serve there in the 40s (he ended up in Burma, so we suspect he may have served under Wingate in both arenas) he may well have ended up with an equal amount of distaste for Jews if he'd been in situ in the late 40s when jewish militias really ramped up activites and carried out the more notorious acts. For the most part though, the Irgun had focused its attention on very practical missions such as raiding British warehouses to nab weaponry, and disrupting the machine. By the late 40s, more than a few of them were veterans of fighting alongside Brits in WWII and murder was not a driving force behind their aims, something which to me is one of the differences between the Islamist Jihad carried out by militias or individuals.

One book I recommend is Menachem Begin's - "The Revolt", in which he makes it clear from the very start that his memoirs in the book are not 'about' the Irgun but about 'his' time in the Irgun, that's all. It clarified what their aims were all along, for me. It is not something that many Brits would want to lay their hands on, but I sucked it up and tried to get a handle on what the Jewish militias were about, and their reasoning. In recent years a British Drama called The Promise was, for many, the first time they'd heard of the Irgun and Lehi. It was a well made but very dangerous drama in the sense that it chose to begin the story it was telling, in the mid to late 40s, ignoring everything that came before and as a result essentially portraying the Arabs throughout as bewildered nnocent children. Do I carry any malice towards Arabs? No, I'm not into generational chips on shoulders and have spent much time with them in Arab countries, observing how they think and hearing 'what' they think, to understand what mechanisms drive them. I get what characterises their attitudes towards Israel, but it doesn't nescessarily mean that I side with their aims though.

[japsportscarmad]

Sweden did the right thing,rest of the Europa needs to follow and recognize Palestine.

No need to consult Israel, eh?

Not sure what this "right thing" is supposed to be for, because it's certainly not at all helpful to bringing about a peaceful two state solution.

The most popular party in West Bank and Gaza is radical Jihadist terrorist Hamas and the majority of "Palestinians" are in favor of violence against Israel.

It's hilarious to me that European "liberal progressives" think doing the "right thing" is to give further international credibility to the incredibly non-progressive Hamas movement. Even funnier when Jews, gays, and feminist women fall for this trendy "Free Palestine River to the sea" Hamas movement, in other words wipe out Israel. Understood from Islamists, of course, welcome to Middle East politics.

This is a recipe for more war, much more war. Thank you very much, Sweden, and it's ilk.

Also while I don't agree with building more "settlements" people are deluding themselves if that actually believe that stopping new settlements would mean most Palestinians would magically recognize the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state. The settlements issue is a crutch. Look at what happened when Israel left Gaza, did that bring peace? Duh.

Jews may run States but not Europa

We know all about the history of Europe and its treatment of Jews (thousands of years) and some people wonder why the Zionist movement gained resonance.

Why persecute one group through the centuries? Not just one ruler or country but almost everywhere very strange as it seems not to have happened to anyone else? Of course we have to be constantly reminded of this fact even though we had nothing to do with it and couldn't care less to be honest, it doesn't matter to 99% of people, every week we are reminded about something that happened to a jew during the war when in reality lots of people died were tortured and abused. Significantly, many millions more than the Jews died yet every week someone talking on the TV about the holocaust trying to make us feel some form of national debt but forgetting that many countries joined against Hitler and lost both people and economic stability. During the last war most of the male members of my family where killed fighting not sticking their hands in the air! But fighting to defend the world from such things that the IDF do every day to mostly innocent women and children.

The important thing is sorting an issue out that many people lost land and rights and had a greater claim to it than the mostly Eastern European Jews who had no real link apart from claims on some old bits of paper and stones. This is the real world not some made up thing based on some crap written on stones and paper. In fact if you want to state a claim perhaps the Pagans who were there before the Jewish people should come back and claim it.

[Donnie Brasco]

Peace has never been Israel's objective in the region.

It's always about what Israel does not about what they say.

[japsportscarmad]

I had and uncle in Palestine at the time in the British army so I would trust what he told me rather than the revised statements of Israeli apologists

As did I have a Grandfather who served in the British Army during the British Mandate Palestine, who died when I was about 12 and was not old enough to know much of anything about world affairs. Looking at his old service book, the dates written there show he served in the British Mandate during the years that would have been right in the midst of the Arab Revolt of 36-39.

Oh what I'd give to be able to chat to him now, but alas.

According to my father, my Grandfather was no fan of Arabs after that, and it must have come from experiences over there, right? Had he continued to serve there in the 40s (he ended up in Burma, so we suspect he may have served under Wingate in both arenas) he may well have ended up with an equal amount of distaste for Jews if he'd been in situ in the late 40s when jewish militias really ramped up activites and carried out the more notorious acts. For the most part though, the Irgun had focused its attention on very practical missions such as raiding British warehouses to nab weaponry, and disrupting the machine. By the late 40s, more than a few of them were veterans of fighting alongside Brits in WWII and murder was not a driving force behind their aims, something which to me is one of the differences between the Islamist Jihad carried out by militias or individuals.

One book I recommend is Menachem Begin's - "The Revolt", in which he makes it clear from the very start that his memoirs in the book are not 'about' the Irgun but about 'his' time in the Irgun, that's all. It clarified what their aims were all along, for me. It is not something that many Brits would want to lay their hands on, but I sucked it up and tried to get a handle on what the Jewish militias were about, and their reasoning. In recent years a British Drama called The Promise was, for many, the first time they'd heard of the Irgun and Lehi. It was a well made but very dangerous drama in the sense that it chose to begin the story it was telling, in the mid to late 40s, ignoring everything that came before and as a result essentially portraying the Arabs throughout as bewildered nnocent children. Do I carry any malice towards Arabs? No, I'm not into generational chips on shoulders and have spent much time with them in Arab countries, observing how they think and hearing 'what' they think, to understand what mechanisms drive them. I get what characterises their attitudes towards Israel, but it doesn't nescessarily mean that I side with their aims though.

That's very fair comment. What regiment was he in? That must be interesting to see the old paperwork and service book very interesting indeed, we have a family bible with lots of letters from mainly the Navy in it about family lost on ships, it's interesting but a little sad at the same time. My Father was also in Palestine but before the bombing at the hotel he didn't like the Arabs much either, but preferred them to the French :-) who he really hated with a passion much more than the Germans who he seemed to have at least some respect for, at least from a logistical and technical organisational point of view. In fact from what I understand many in the UK before the war seemed to think we either shouldn't get involved or side with Hitler, strange to even consider that with hindsight. However, back to the post it's fair to say we really screwed the Middle East up didn't we which ever way we look at it and still continue.

[johna]

"If pursued, these plans would once again raise grave doubts about Israel's commitment to achieving durable peace with the Palestinians as the new settlements threaten the very viability of the future State of Palestine," Feltman said.

They do not want peace , and they do not want a palestinian state , everybody knows by now ...!

The Palestinians do not want Israel to be a state ... everybody knows that.

Every peace plan agreed to by Israel and the Palestinians was sabotaged by the Israelis, but what you wont say is,

The Israelis do not want Palestinian to be a state... everybody knows that.

[japsportscarmad]

"If pursued, these plans would once again raise grave doubts about Israel's commitment to achieving durable peace with the Palestinians as the new settlements threaten the very viability of the future State of Palestine," Feltman said.

They do not want peace , and they do not want a palestinian state , everybody knows by now ...!

The Palestinians do not want Israel to be a state ... everybody knows that.

Every peace plan agreed to by Israel and the Palestinians was sabotaged by the Israelis, but what you wont say is,

The Israelis do not want Palestinian to be a state... everybody knows that.

In my opinion, the biggest issue is Israel's lack of importance in the world and whilst I have always supported them in the past what I see now has changed my mind as a fair debate needs to be had.

Unfortunately as Israel continues to piss off the international community and we need Iran more "as our enemies enemy is our friend" with IS the Israelis are as impotant as they are not allowed to hit Iran now with their nuclear facilities and they continue to develop their capability into the future which they without doubt will. Significantly, the U.S. Has put a stop to Israel jets flying in and dropping a few bombs and they will not act without first getting permission from their biggest funder, as Israel would be bankrupt on their own. Saudi and the other Arab States will not continue to see their most holy site decimated and be degraded in Jerusalem for much longer so the Middle East will become even more unstable. If you look at the Israeli military capability it is good against women and children (most of the Palestinian men seem to be in jail without trial) would that be like a concentration camp? The Israeli military IDF lost too many troops in the recent incursion as not used to such hand to hand fighting without their drones to target who they want and I doubt wether Israeli public opinion would allow many more deaths so it would have a major problem with a fight now with a well armed and organised opposition, and how would the U.S. Deal with it they couldn't.

Also don't believe that everyone in Israel believes that the Palestinians have no rights and should not have land as that is not the case.

[Lissos]

What regiment was he in?

Off the top of my head, I don't know. I'll rummage through the cupboards tommorow, to locate the book again.

he didn't like the Arabs much either, but preferred them to the French :-) who he really hated with a passion

That must be interesting to see the old paperwork and service book very interesting indeed,

I suppose I could dig deeper. How feasable it is to follow up military breadcrumbs to find out more about his time there, I don't know though. If British Mandate records were shipped back to Britain or all reside in the State of Israel today, I don't know. I have a book with excerpts of diaries from British civilians (families of serving military or diplomats etc) during the Mandate, and it should detail where the book's source material is located.

However, back to the post it's fair to say we really screwed the Middle East up didn't we which ever way we look at it and still continue.

It is this elephant in the room which is where my approach to the conflict is rooted really. Great Britain created a catastrophic muddle, but more often than not we gloss over that and take firm positions of condemnation against either of the two peoples who had to deal with the mess and survive it the best they could. It appears that Great Britain was using what was now a rather archaic British India modus operandi. It worked in some districts of the Mandate, but was not sufficient to deal with the passions and grievances arising. Add in promises being given to both sides at different times since 1917 from different levels of British heiracy and locations, mixed loyalties taking place towards either side at a local British military level, and it all contributed to a the water slowly but surely boiling. Orde Wingate was leading night operations with Jews against Arab militias in the mid to late 30s due to personal religious fervour, and then in February 1948 British deserters buddied up with Arabs to blow up Ben Yehuda St using British trucks, while other British soldiers stayed behind to fight for a Jewish victory as people like John Bagot Glubb were also leading the Arab Legion.

It is for this reason that although the actions carried out along the way by various peoples were indeed brutal, and continue to be today, I don't seem to carry the same exasperation that some onlookers do about how the conflict persists, as I appreciate the passions of why it persists today.

[dexterm]

I am not missing the point at all the majority how did the Arabs start it they were there then moved.

You are posting such bizarre baloney, I don't know where to start. The Arabs started attacking Jews at the beginning of last century and in a serious organized way around 1920. If the Arabs were "moved" it was either from land that they did not own or during the war in 1948 that THEY started.

If you are going to tell a fib, UG, why not make it a big one? The truth is quite different.

Israelis have fired the first shot in every single war since 1948 apart from 1973 when the Egyptians caught the IDF napping in order to regain their occupied land.

You also conveniently fail to mention the 400,000 Palestinians who were ethnically-cleansed before the start of the 1948 war in massacres by the Israeli terrorist gangs Irgun and Lehi such as in the village of Deir Yassin

"Around 107 villagers were killed during and after the battle for the village, including women and children—some were shot, while others died when hand grenades were thrown into their homes."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre

Edited November 1, 2014 by dexterm

[Ulysses G.]

Probably complete nonsense considering your track record.

However, the Palestinian Arabs began attacking the Jews around the turn of last century and in an organized manner, starting with the Arab riots in the 1920s. They were slaughtering innocent Jews LONG before 1948 when the Arabs declared war and the Jews struck back and defeated them soundly.

Edited November 1, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

Israelis have fired the first shot in every single war since 1948

More BS. Why don't you produce some evidence for this - false - claim from a CREDIBLE source? The Arabs admitted starting the war in 1948. I guess you think they were lying. Jamal Husseini - chairman of the Arab Higher Committee - told the Security Council:

"The representative of the Jewish Agency told us yesterday that they were not the attackers, that the Arabs had begun the fighting. We did not deny this. We told the whole world that we were going to fight."

After the United Nations announced partition on November 29, 1947, the Arabs declared a protest strike and instigated riots that claimed the lives of 62 Jews. The first large-scale attacks began on January 9, 1948, when around 1,000 Arabs attacked Jewish communities in northern Palestine

Edited November 1, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

"If pursued, these plans would once again raise grave doubts about Israel's commitment to achieving durable peace with the Palestinians as the new settlements threaten the very viability of the future State of Palestine," Feltman said.

They do not want peace , and they do not want a palestinian state , everybody knows by now ...!

The Palestinians do not want Israel to be a state ... everybody knows that.

Every peace plan agreed to by Israel and the Palestinians was sabotaged by the Israelis, but what you wont say is, The Israelis do not want Palestinian to be a state... everybody knows that.

That is delusional. If the Palestinians don't get their own state, Israel would have to absorb them eventually and no more Jewish state. What they want is a Palestinian state that is not an armed terrorist camp, trying to push them into the sea. When the Palestinians finally agree to a sincere peace, they will get their own independent country and not before.

Edited November 1, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[dexterm]

Israelis have fired the first shot in every single war since 1948

More BS. Why don't you produce some evidence for this - false - claim from a CREDIBLE source? The Arabs admitted starting the war in 1948. I guess you think they were lying. Jamal Husseini - chairman of the Arab Higher Committee - told the Security Council:

"The representative of the Jewish Agency told us yesterday that they were not the attackers, that the Arabs had begun the fighting. We did not deny this. We told the whole world that we were going to fight."

After the United Nations announced partition on November 29, 1947, the Arabs declared a protest strike and instigated riots that claimed the lives of 62 Jews. The first large-scale attacks began on January 9, 1948, when around 1,000 Arabs attacked Jewish communities in northern Palestine

Credible link please

[Ulysses G.]

Credible link please

One that is perfect for you. it also addresses the dishonest accusations about Deir Yassin. You should download the whole book::

http://books.google.co.th/books?id=ft-BgQpMvmUC&pg=PA162&lpg=PA162&dq=Jamal+Husseini++told+the+Security+Council:+"The+representative+of+the+Jewish+Agency+told+us+yesterday+that+they+were+not+the+attackers,+that+the+Arabs+had+begun+the+fighting.+We+did+not+deny+this.+We+told+the+whole+world+that+we+were+going+to+fight."&source=bl&ots=p_zkTv9IyX&sig=BGnTQ-QHzleSRnKEB_7hxwzhyyg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=wFhUVJv_No-MuATP9IHIDg&ved=0CCgQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=Jamal%20Husseini%20%20told%20the%20Security%20Council%3A%20"The%20representative%20of%20the%20Jewish%20Agency%20told%20us%20yesterday%20that%20they%20were%20not%20the%20attackers%2C%20that%20the%20Arabs%20had%20begun%20the%20fighting.%20We%20did%20not%20deny%20this.%20We%20told%20the%20whole%20world%20that%20we%20were%20going%20to%20fight."&f=false

Edited November 1, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[arjunadawn]

"If pursued, these plans would once again raise grave doubts about Israel's commitment to achieving durable peace with the Palestinians as the new settlements threaten the very viability of the future State of Palestine," Feltman said.

They do not want peace , and they do not want a palestinian state , everybody knows by now ...!

The Palestinians do not want Israel to be a state ... everybody knows that.

Every peace plan agreed to by Israel and the Palestinians was sabotaged by the Israelis, but what you wont say is,

The Israelis do not want Palestinian to be a state... everybody knows that.

I am unsure if it is true that Israel does not want the Palestinians to have a State. I am pretty sure they do not want the Palestinians to have a state carved out of land that is rightfully titled and belonging to Israel. Few recall that the arabs agreed to the mandates that carved the land into arab, christian, and jewish areas. They agreed. No protests. No reservations, and thus were born multiple mandates, with the "Palestinian Mandate" being the more famous name most know. Lebanon is a Mandate, as is Jordan in the transjordan area. These lands were created, consisdered, debated long before WWII. The various arab entities of the time did not mind. Only after the creation and later announcment that from this titled mandate the State of Israel was born- Gen M. Dyan, the new Jordanian army attacked and occupied legally titled Israeli land for 19 years. They are now pushed out after 1967.

So, if you subtract or resolve the issue of Gaza and Golan from Israeli legal lands you are left with a strong, soverign, legitimate title to the State of Israel. All the nonsense of international law to the contrary, this land is Israel's according to International Law and timeless precedent. Does Israel want the Palestinians to have a state when the state created for them in the transjordan rejected them multipe times? I would only support a state in Gaza, the sinai, or the transjordan. Unless the palestinians are granted a piece of Jordan and Lebanon (two other Mandates) I see no reason why they should be granted a piece of the jewish mandate- they already had one.

[dexterm]

500,000 Palestinian Christians and Muslims did indeed live peacefully alongside a small Jewish population of 10,000 prior to 1896 when Theodor Herzl established the Zionist movement with the avowed intention of displacing the Palestinians and replacing them with Jewish immigrants. Which they are still doing today.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Herzl

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism

Why do you constantly provide links that prove you have posted yet another fabrication? I don't see anything about any intention to "displace the Palestinians and replace them with Jewish immigrants." In fact, according to your links, he wanted to live in harmony with other races and religions and resisted any suggested to make them second class citizens - maybe you should try actually reading them.

Both you and apsportscarmad have a bad habit of mixing a few historical facts in with a load of nonsense that you have made up from thin air.

There has been an almost unbroken policy of Zionists to expand their colonies to displace the existing Palestinian residents.. Is it any wonder that the Palestinians protested, and fought, albeit with their hands tied by the British and corrupt Arab rulers, against the hordes of uninvited illegal Jewish immigrants who intended to ethnically cleanse them?

Here are a few examples of Theodor Herzl’s and other early Zionists’good neighbor policy towards Palestinians which seems to have been maintained right through to Ariel Sharon in 1998. There are multiple links in Google. I used mainly Wikipedia and Israeli Rabbi Chaim Simons…a gold mine of original source material....well worth a read http://chaimsimons.net/

“We must expropriate gently the private property on the estates assigned to us. We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our country. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discretely and circumspectly” Theodore Herzl, Complete Diaries, June 12, 1985 entry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Herzl

Israel Zangwill, an early Zionist, who in 1901 infamously called Palestine "A land without a people for a people without a land" even though he had never been there. To his credit he later retracted that statement, realizing the Palestinian residents formed twice the population density of the USA.

“Alas, it was a misleading mistake. The country holds 600,000 Arabs."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Zangwill

“There is, however, a difficulty from which the Zionist dares not avert his eyes, though he rarely likes to face it. Palestine proper has already its inhabitants.... So we must be prepared either to drive out by the sword the tribes in possession as our forefathers did, or to grapple with the problem of a large alien population, mostly Mohammedan.” Israel Zangwill . December 1904 edition of the American Jewish newspaper “The Maccabaean”

http://chaimsimons.net/transfer07.html

“It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both peoples….If the Arabs leave it, the country will become wide and spacious for us…. The only solution is a Land of Israel…without Arabs. There is no room here for compromises…There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighboring countries, and to transfer all of them, save perhaps [a few]”. Joseph Weitz, the director of the Jewish National Fund 1940

Source: Benny Morris, The Birth of the Palestine Refugee Problem, 1947-1949 (Cambridge, 1988), p. 27; As cited in Finkelstein, Image, p. 86.

And Weitz again.. “Not one village, not one tribe should be left. And the form of the transfer needs to be the creation of a refuge for them in Iraq, in Syria and even in Transjordan.”

http://chaimsimons.net/transfer12.html

"The land of Israel is not small at all, if only the Arabs were removed, and its frontiers enlarged a little, to the north up to the Litani, and to the east including the Golan Heights...with the Arabs transferred to northern Syria and Iraq...Today we have no other alternative...We will not live here with Arabs."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yosef_Weitz

"Everybody has to move, run and grab as many [Palestinian] hilltops as they can to enlarge the [Jewish] settlements because everything we take now will stay ours... Everything we don't grab will go to them."

Ariel Sharon in comments broadcast on Israeli radio in November 1998

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-11576714

[Ulysses G.]

So, you are doing what you always do when caught posting dishonest crap, just continue posting more of it. I am not going to bother policing every quote, but the first one is yet another out and out distortion on your part. Theodor Herzl was not talking about Palestine as you claim. He was talking about Argentina and you purposely ignored that AND left out the first line of the quote - both from YOUR link:

Herzl wanted to win over non-Jewish opinion for Zionism.[34] When he was still thinking of Argentina as a possible venue for massive Jewish immigration, he wrote in his diary:

"When we occupy the land, we shall bring immediate benefits to the state that receives us"

http://en.wikipedia....i/Theodor_Herzl

Edited November 1, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[dexterm]

So, you are doing what you always do when caught posting dishonest crap, just continue posting more of it.

Perhaps other members can study for themselves the clear intentions of the Zionist movement in colonizing Palestine ...perhaps allowing a little more time than the 2 minutes it took you to respond so eruditely.

[Ulysses G.]

Maybe they can think about the fact that you have been caught lying multiple times on multiple threads about Israel and continue to do it. The evidence is often right in your own links, which you seem to think no one is going to read. It took less than 30 seconds to find your first blatant fabrication. Why would anyone waste the time on more?

Edited November 1, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[dexterm]

"If pursued, these plans would once again raise grave doubts about Israel's commitment to achieving durable peace with the Palestinians as the new settlements threaten the very viability of the future State of Palestine," Feltman said.

They do not want peace , and they do not want a palestinian state , everybody knows by now ...!

The Palestinians do not want Israel to be a state ... everybody knows that.

Every peace plan agreed to by Israel and the Palestinians was sabotaged by the Israelis, but what you wont say is,

The Israelis do not want Palestinian to be a state... everybody knows that.

I am unsure if it is true that Israel does not want the Palestinians to have a State. I am pretty sure they do not want the Palestinians to have a state carved out of land that is rightfully titled and belonging to Israel. Few recall that the arabs agreed to the mandates that carved the land into arab, christian, and jewish areas. They agreed. No protests. No reservations, and thus were born multiple mandates, with the "Palestinian Mandate" being the more famous name most know. Lebanon is a Mandate, as is Jordan in the transjordan area. These lands were created, consisdered, debated long before WWII. The various arab entities of the time did not mind. Only after the creation and later announcment that from this titled mandate the State of Israel was born- Gen M. Dyan, the new Jordanian army attacked and occupied legally titled Israeli land for 19 years. They are now pushed out after 1967.

So, if you subtract or resolve the issue of Gaza and Golan from Israeli legal lands you are left with a strong, soverign, legitimate title to the State of Israel. All the nonsense of international law to the contrary, this land is Israel's according to International Law and timeless precedent. Does Israel want the Palestinians to have a state when the state created for them in the transjordan rejected them multipe times? I would only support a state in Gaza, the sinai, or the transjordan. Unless the palestinians are granted a piece of Jordan and Lebanon (two other Mandates) I see no reason why they should be granted a piece of the jewish mandate- they already had one.

Did anyone bother to ask the Palestinian residents what they wanted? What right did a foreign power have to confiscate land from an existing population and give it to aliens who had never even set eyes on Palestine.

With all your misinformation about "Jewish Mandates" ...maybe you should take a refresher course on what was actually proposed too, which has already been more than doubled in Israeli land grabs. Why are they so greedy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

[harryfrompattaya]

Wow UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon can not and will not get along will his peaceful Brothers in North Korea in fact trying to kill them over throw their legit Government is criticizes Israel for building home for all people Christians Muslims and Jews.

And even a General Ban Ki moon can apply to live their

I have a message for him get along with North Korea

[dexterm]

Maybe they can think about the fact that you have been caught lying multiple times on multiple threads about Israel and continue to do it. The evidence is often right in your own links, which you seem to think no one is going to read. It took less than 30 seconds to find your first blatant fabrication. Why would anyone waste the time on more?

It appears you are the only one interpreting my posts that way...I must be hitting a raw nerve.

The truth will out.

[Ulysses G.]

Did anyone bother to ask the Palestinian residents what they wanted?

Yes they did. There were negotiations with them for years. At one point the Jews even accepted a deal for a country with everyone living together in peace and the Arabs controlling the government. The Arabs turned it down. What the Palestinian Arabs "wanted" was war. They started one and they LOST it.

[harryfrompattaya]

The so-called Palestine has never been a nation/state. The reason it isn't accepted is because it's a terrorist group. There was the PLO under Arafat and there is Hamas...

Try that one out on the UK or the US. Settle a bunch of terrorists on the border who lob rockets in and commit themselves to the destruction of the UK or US.

Now watch and see what happens.

Do you know how the current State of Israel was formed?

Do you know how many British people and Palestinians were murdered by cowardly zionist terrorists I won't use the word jew as they were zionists although were of the Jewish faith. Furthermore, these terrorist cowards are revered as heros in Israel, have never faced prison or sanction but we're clearly cowards and murderers.

Do you know Palestine was a state before modern Israel was even conceived yes a state with laws and rules and general peace where Christians, Arabs and Jews lived together without too much trouble at all, shared the resources and respected the law, under British rule.

I best tell you so everyone knows a little about how the current conflict originated and why there is hatred.

Prior to the establishment of Israel, a terror (note the word terror) campaign against the British authority and Palestinian Arabs was carried out predominantly by two semi paramilitary organisations that supported Revisionist Zionist ideologies: Etzel (Irgun) and Lehi (Stern Gang). Both groups reflected the view of Zeev Jabotinsky that a sovereign Jewish state had to be created on both sides of the Jordan River, through violence or any means required.

Furthermore between 1939 and 1942, Etzel carried out over 60 terrorist attacks, killing more than 120 Palestinians and maiming hundreds more. In order to hasten British departure from Palestine. Significantly, Lehi operatives assassinated Lord Moyne, the minister resident in the Middle East, on November 6, 1944, in Cairo. On July 26, 1946, explosives planted by Etzel agents leveled the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, the administrative center of the British Mandatory authority, killing 91 Britons and injuring close to 500 people.

Who are the real terrorists? one mans terrorist is another mans hero and if someone had stolen my land, houses, farm, factory I might be a little more than just unhappy. Isreal always uses the rocket attacks as defence of its policies. However, in reality most of the rockets are little more than big fireworks that do little damage.

You might not like it but you can't re write history :-)

You English had trouble in Africa India China and even in America Ireland and Scotland and now you cry like babies of a little bomb in the King David Hotel

Tell me why you were afraid of the Germans?

[Ulysses G.]

Maybe they can think about the fact that you have been caught lying multiple times on multiple threads about Israel and continue to do it. The evidence is often right in your own links, which you seem to think no one is going to read. It took less than 30 seconds to find your first blatant fabrication. Why would anyone waste the time on more?

It appears you are the only one interpreting my posts that way...

That is funny. I seem to remember seem to remember a number of very knowledgeable posters pointing out dishonest posts that you wrote and providing evidence from credible sources that they were deceitful. I am not the first one to point out your fraudulent version of "history".

Edited November 1, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[harryfrompattaya]

You will note my post above where I am happy to condemn terrorist acts carried out by Hamas, perhaps then you will join me by condemning the terrorist act on the St David's hotel?

Hamas are not heroes and nor were the PLO or Arafat, but they are in fact a symptom of the current situation. If you were suddenly forced to move your home without any thought or compensation would you just give up and go? And wether you like it or not that is the situation many Arabs are in and are continuing to be in.

You are correct about Arab opposition for an Isreali state which has persisted over the years, but it is a two way street, and unfortunately Isreal seems to be loosing suport and the new boycott campaigns seem to be having some effect rightly or wrongly. Isreal will also have to lie in its bed it creates particularly over settlements and further encroachment into the occupied territories, as the international tide of unconditional suport is unfortunately slowly turning against it. The political situation in America has also changed and unless the Republicans win next time which is quiet possible then it looks like the tide will be up on the beach. The Palestinian supporters are also getting better at handling social media and publicising their claims which as we saw with the recent incursions into Gaza didn't help Israel at all, particularly when they claimed they were hitting Hamas arms dumps (which were their intended targets I do not doubt) then they hit a UN compound full of refugees effectively under pseudo UN protection.

It's a mess and I am not sure there is a good answer that can or will be applied, as emotions run very high on both sides as can be seen even in our little forum.

Once again stop crying about the King David Hotel it was great you are still crying about it

A great man carried it out we call Brave Heart Benny

[harryfrompattaya]

Why someone is harassed thousands of years?

Wat dee Why someone is harassed thousands of years? Simple because of fools like you

Take you pills a give mil her money it the first of the Month

[Ulysses G.]

The Bombing of the British Military Headquarters - The King David Hotel - happened shortly after the UK - and everyone else - were purposely bombing civilians indiscriminately in Dresden and elsewhere. That is how wars were fought back then. I know it gives some people a thrill up their leg to call Jews "terrorists", but it is hypocritical. They were no more terrorists than their Arab enemies and most of the world during that time period. Thankfully, Western civilization has evolved since then.

[arjunadawn]

The Palestinians do not want Israel to be a state ... everybody knows that.

Every peace plan agreed to by Israel and the Palestinians was sabotaged by the Israelis, but what you wont say is,

The Israelis do not want Palestinian to be a state... everybody knows that.

I am unsure if it is true that Israel does not want the Palestinians to have a State. I am pretty sure they do not want the Palestinians to have a state carved out of land that is rightfully titled and belonging to Israel. Few recall that the arabs agreed to the mandates that carved the land into arab, christian, and jewish areas. They agreed. No protests. No reservations, and thus were born multiple mandates, with the "Palestinian Mandate" being the more famous name most know. Lebanon is a Mandate, as is Jordan in the transjordan area. These lands were created, consisdered, debated long before WWII. The various arab entities of the time did not mind. Only after the creation and later announcment that from this titled mandate the State of Israel was born- Gen M. Dyan, the new Jordanian army attacked and occupied legally titled Israeli land for 19 years. They are now pushed out after 1967.

So, if you subtract or resolve the issue of Gaza and Golan from Israeli legal lands you are left with a strong, soverign, legitimate title to the State of Israel. All the nonsense of international law to the contrary, this land is Israel's according to International Law and timeless precedent. Does Israel want the Palestinians to have a state when the state created for them in the transjordan rejected them multipe times? I would only support a state in Gaza, the sinai, or the transjordan. Unless the palestinians are granted a piece of Jordan and Lebanon (two other Mandates) I see no reason why they should be granted a piece of the jewish mandate- they already had one.

Did anyone bother to ask the Palestinian residents what they wanted? What right did a foreign power have to confiscate land from an existing population and give it to aliens who had never even set eyes on Palestine.

With all your misinformation about "Jewish Mandates" ...maybe you should take a refresher course on what was actually proposed too, which has already been more than doubled in Israeli land grabs. Why are they so greedy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

Why dont you choose to redirect your conversation to a less confrontational tone, or direct it eleswhere? There is little room for "your" "you" etc. It serves to continue the confrontational conversation noted here with others. I am not others!

There were no "Palestinians" to ask what they wanted and yes, all the arabs via their relative representatives did support the mandates. The link you cite categorically disproves your comments above. Indeed, it confirms what others on the TV have been saying. You see, the Mandate was the governing instrument by the late 1940s and was a legal instrument by all accounts- it still is under international law. The UN sought to update the Mandate by changing realities on the ground- jewish and muslim zionism! However, the UN was without legal authority to do this without members approval. All the UN could do in the end was subsume existing league of nations instruments into UN verbatim.

The proposed UN partition plan was rejected by the arabs. Why? A suggestion to this answer might be found either in the arabs own words rejecting the partition plan or the Jordanians unprovoked invasion of the now West Bank. The arabs rejected every single element that was legally entitled to the Jews and when the jews conceeded they would yeild to more in a 1940s unprecedented revision, the arabs who gained more, opposed all.

UN instruments are not binding on unwilling participants. The UN has shown little appetite for UN enforcement, oppossed to peacekeeping. With Israel accepting a more limiting partition years after they were already titled greater lands, it should surprise people that arabs rejected it. When discussing the "Palestinians," this was their voice- they rejected the partition. When it is asserted the "Palestinians" had no voice in the Mandate allotment, which of course they did, another chance was provided during the time seeking ratification of the UN Partition plan. Again, and more locally, the arabs ("Palestinians") rejected Israel even offering more lands. Indeed, the arabs have always made clear their intention, if you pay attention- they seek the total anhilation of Israel. If the jews desired useless land in the arab quarter, or a barren rock on the north african coast, the arabs would still oppose them.

Indeed, I ask "Why are they so greedy?"

Edited November 1, 2014 by arjunadawn

[Seastallion]

So, you are doing what you always do when caught posting dishonest crap, just continue posting more of it.

Perhaps other members can study for themselves the clear intentions of the Zionist movement in colonizing Palestine ...perhaps allowing a little more time than the 2 minutes it took you to respond so eruditely.

More current is the Likud Party's platform. This is plainly the root of the criticism in the OP'.

• The 1999 Likud Party platform emphasizes the right of settlement.

"The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting."^[27]

They state they claim the land from the sea to the Jordan river, ie all of it.

[Ulysses G.]

The link you cite categorically disproves your comments above. Indeed, it confirms what others on the TV have been saying.

I just don't get why dexterm makes these ridiculous claims and then gives links to sources that prove him WRONG. Does he even bother to read them?