Palestinians to sue Britain over 1917 pledge on Jewish state

[dexterm]

So chowny77 - are all English football supporters hooligans? Where should they f*****f to? They were there before Israel was formed.

No they were not. How far do you want to go back? Gaza was under Ottoman control, a Turkish possession until the British took over. Immediately prior to the British presence, it was depopulated due to an earthquake that levelled everything.

In respect to the territory now called the West Bank , it too was under Ottoman rule and was a Turkish possession until the British took over. At the same time there was agreement on the San Remo Agreement, Transjordan was created by the British. Will the PLA be suing the Jordanians and asking for the dismantling of Jordan? They may wish to tread carefully as the British granted the West Bank area to a proposed Arab state in the Balfour declaration. However, in the war of Israel's independence, Jordan captured it and annexed it. No arab state for those people, courtesy of the Jordanians.

These PLA arabs are so stupid. The Balfour declaration which recognized the rights of a future Israel, also proposed the creation of a new Arab state. They can't have it both ways. If Balfour is to be discarded, then the demands of the arabs to the west bank will be discarded too. They are never happy.

>>They may wish to tread carefully as the British granted the West Bank area to a proposed Arab state in the Balfour declaration.

You are making it up. Where does it mention the West Bank in the Balfour Declaration?

"His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration

Presumably the Palestinians are suing the British because they did not ensure the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine. In fact Britain did just the opposite; executing, exiling and disarming Palestinians, while allowing European Jewish colonizers to be armed. They even helped to train the Zionists.

Edited July 27, 2016 by dexterm

[dexterm]

The Palestinians are not exactly wild about a negotiated settlement. They have been dragging their heals for 70 years. The blame is certainly not on Israel alone.

As long as the Israelis continue building illegal settlements and occupying Palestinian land outside their internationally recognized 1967 borders, then they are to blame for the current impasse.

As long as the Palestinians keep up their terrorist war and refusing to sign a peace treat, Israel is justified in building settlements as well as striking back with military force. Hamas is still shooting rockets into Israel and attacking soldiers with mortars. THEY are to blame for the impasse.

>>Israel is justified in building settlements

Not according to Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which specifically prohibits an occupying force from transferring its own civilian population on to territory it occupies.

The same Geneva Convention to which Israel is a signatory also forbids the occupying power from ethnically cleansing the existing Palestinian residents

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention#Section_III._Occupied_territories

In UN Resolution 446, the Security Council determined: "that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_446

The EU and US also consider the settlements illegal and an obstacle to peace.

[xineohp]

Palestinian "leaders" grasping at black hole straws for PR purposes only. Deal with the situation NOW. The ONLY hope is direct negotiations with ISRAEL.

If one has lived and worked with Arabs and in particular Palestinians, one would be acutely aware as to their bona fides in wanting a homeland. This is no different to the dream the Jewish people looked towards for centuries. Palestinians have for far too long been at the mercy of the military might of Israel and "direct negotiations with ISRAEL" have amounted to nothing. When one has to deal with the intransigence of folk such as Netanyahu, one can understand why. A clear and unambiguous ruling coming from the ICJ would go a long way to legitimising their claim.

[dexterm]

Most of the problems in the region can be traced back to English and French foreign policy. As the guy says in respect of Palestine: a promise made by those who didn't own to those who didn't deserve.

No one would dispute the right of the Jews to seek to reside , in safety, in the region....either in a state of their own or on some Cyprus-like arrangement.

What is untenable though is the complete intransigence of the current Israeli govt ( and the complicit lap dog lickspittles in Washington, Hilary Clinton being one). The more they resist a negotiated settlement,the less likely it can end well for Israel. Rabin well understood that but not the loony fringe successors.

This land was not gifted by God but rather at the whim of a sleazy British politician

The Israeli intransigence is a direct result of the PLA walking away form a peace deal that had been agreed to in hopes of their getting more. The Israelis are taking a hard line because elf the years of violence. They can sit back and laugh now as Arabs and muslims bring their culture to the EU.

The PLA could have peace very easily. All they need to do is to take the higher moral ground and adopt a peaceful lifestyle for a few years. Israel would be unable to say no.

Your second paragraph is actually one of the few things upon which I agree with you.

I do not condemn violent resistance against an illegal occupying army and illegal land stealing Zionist colonizers, but I think Palestinians would be better served arming themselves with $30 smart phones, practising passive resistance, then broadcasting Israel's daily humiliations, beatings and murders on the social media shaming Israel into a just peace deal. Creating an international outcry and eventual external pressures that force Israel to see sense.

Edited July 27, 2016 by dexterm

[Ulysses G.]

Bearing grudges from a century ago instead of rolling ones sleeves up and making the best of things encapsulates the self-pity which has held the Palestinians back from the day they were first invented.

. Since the Palestinians were invented (by a terrorist born in Egypt) in the 1960s.

Perhaps you ought actually to read the OP Balfour Declaration

As you well know, Palestine was a geographical area - not a country - and the Jews living there were the ones referred to as Palestinians. Arabs were usually referred to as ARABS. After Israel became a nation, the terrorist Arafat highjacked the term. Edited July 27, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[Morakot]

[dexterm]

@UG

Sorry, thread full..

UG wrote:

As you well know, Palestine was a geographical area - not a country - and the Jews living there were the ones referred to as Palestinians. Arabs were usually referred to as ARABS. After Israel became a nation, the terrorist Arafat highjacked the term.

What utter baloney and chutzpah. Not only have Zionists stolen Palestinian land, you would now have the 12% Jewish population in 1917 stealing their name too.

And the majority 88% non Jewish resident population at the time of Balfour being invisible people not even entitled to the name Palestinians which somehow only the minority resident Jews could claim.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/demograhics.html

Here you see Zionist mythology making at work, folks. The mind boggling ability to call black white.

Edited July 27, 2016 by dexterm

[dexterm]

The audacity of the Brit Balfour to give away someone else's land to a bunch of European Zionist colonizers whose intention was to dispossess the resident Palestinian population is incredible. And the UK at the time, not having even won the war yet, were giving away land that did not even belong to them by any stretch of international law, let alone of morality.

[TravelerEastWest]

Bearing grudges from a century ago instead of rolling ones sleeves up and making the best of things encapsulates the self-pity which has held the Palestinians back from the day they were first invented.

Exactly.

[Jingthing]

Bearing grudges from a century ago instead of rolling ones sleeves up and making the best of things encapsulates the self-pity which has held the Palestinians back from the day they were first invented.

. Since the Palestinians were invented (by a terrorist born in Egypt) in the 1960s.

Perhaps you ought actually to read the OP Balfour Declaration

As you well know, Palestine was a geographical area - not a country - and the Jews living there were the ones referred to as Palestinians. Arabs were usually referred to as ARABS. After Israel became a nation, the terrorist Arafat highjacked the term.

Indeed, the political movement that led to Arabs in that region identifying specifically as PALESTINIAN Arabs was started by the infamous Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, the Nazi Mufti, the "Palestinian" that worked with Hitler to exterminate European Jews and got a promise from Hitler to go into the Middle East and exterminate all the Jews there as well.

Of course, as things stand now, the best hope is a two state solution. It could have been a lot easier before, many missed chances, so I understand those who feel pessimistic about that ever happening.

But don't be deceived ... THINK for a moment about what this latest Palestinian game is suggesting. They're suggesting that Israel should have never existed and they absurdly dream if they win such cases, they can turn back history and make it not exist now. These leaders do not accept the existence of the state of Israel.

That is unacceptable and this latest silly game is unacceptable.

[DeaconJohn]

I can see the answer..............F&^K OFF!! You Muslim <deleted> eaters!

I don't think that will be the judgement of the ICJ - or whatever international court ultimately decides this case.

Israel is in blatant violation of international law by their occupation of Palestinian territory.

If the Palestinians and their increasing number of supporters worldwide can get the radical Zionists to abandon their objective of ​Eretz Israel ​and live within their 1967 borders, then this court case will have been a success.

It is the only scenario upon which a viable two-state solution can be based. The alternative is continued bloodshed and an inhuman occupation that is turning the whole world against Israel and will have negative effects on Jews wherever they live.

Diaspora Jews are starting to realize this, and they may be the ones who - together with the peace groups within Israel - bring about the downfall of the Zionist zealots who are moving toward a single state with millions of hostile Palestinians who must be killed, driven into neighbouring countries, or kept in bantustans.

There will be no good outcomes for Israel unless they accept their legitimate borders and live within them.

[Jingthing]

Oh please. Stop with the blatant disingenuousness. This case is not about 1967 borders or ANY borders. This case is about the toxic real view of the majority of Palestinian Arabs ... that Israel shouldn't have ever existed and shouldn't exist now within ANY borders. So it's a stupid, hateful, destructive, absurd, pointless, destined to fail case.

Get to the table, directly negotiate with Israel fully accepting the existence of Israel, stop inciting terrorism, Hamas stop building invasion tunnels and change the charter away from it's genocidal aims, protest yes but non-violently only ... and then and ONLY then will the Palestinian Arabs actually make any real progress towards the reasonable goal of an independent Palestinian state living side by side with the Jewish state of Israel.

Edited July 27, 2016 by Jingthing

[dexterm]

I can see the answer..............F&^K OFF!! You Muslim <deleted> eaters!

I don't think that will be the judgement of the ICJ - or whatever international court ultimately decides this case.

Israel is in blatant violation of international law by their occupation of Palestinian territory.

If the Palestinians and their increasing number of supporters worldwide can get the radical Zionists to abandon their objective of ​Eretz Israel ​and live within their 1967 borders, then this court case will have been a success.

It is the only scenario upon which a viable two-state solution can be based. The alternative is continued bloodshed and an inhuman occupation that is turning the whole world against Israel and will have negative effects on Jews wherever they live.

Diaspora Jews are starting to realize this, and they may be the ones who - together with the peace groups within Israel - bring about the downfall of the Zionist zealots who are moving toward a single state with millions of hostile Palestinians who must be killed, driven into neighbouring countries, or kept in bantustans.

There will be no good outcomes for Israel unless they accept their legitimate borders and live within them.

I agree with your sentiments entirely, but a point of order; "their legitimate borders". Israel has never defined its borders. They keep expanding. Most international observers consider the 1967 green line of armistice as the best basis for negotiations. The Palestinians have already magnanimously recognized an Israeli state on land stolen in 1948.

Even in the Balfour Declaration a Jewish State was never mentioned: "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people"... a home, a haven from persecution perhaps, not a homeland.

In that Israel has broken the proviso in the Balfour Declaration "it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine" presumably the British memo is null and void. But the UK has a lot to answer for by allowing the ethnic cleansing, misery and repression heaped upon the resident Palestinian population by the European Zionist colonizers Balfour's government was encouraging.

I wish the Palestinians success in their suing of the British government. It will at least publicize the gross injustice and deceit upon which Israel is founded.

[dexterm]

Oh please. Stop with the blatant disingenuousness. This case is not about 1967 borders or ANY borders. This case is about the toxic real view of the majority of Palestinian Arabs ... that Israel shouldn't have ever existed and shouldn't exist now within ANY borders. So it's a stupid, hateful, destructive, absurd, pointless, destined to fail case.

Get to the table, directly negotiate with Israel fully accepting the existence of Israel, stop inciting terrorism, protest yes but non-violently only ... and then and ONLY then will the Palestinian Arabs actually make any real progress.

>>This case is about the toxic real view of the majority of Palestinian Arabs ... that Israel shouldn't have ever existed and shouldn't exist now within ANY borders.

Baloney.

Yasser Arafat recognized Israel's right to exist as far back as 1988, and repeated it in writing in 1993 at the Oslo Accords.

The world is still waiting for Israel to reciprocate recognizing the right of Palestinians to self determination in their own viable state. Instead they have simply grabbed more land, built more colonies, and dispossessed more Palestinians.

Here is Arafat's 1993 letter recognizing Israel...

"Mr. Prime Minister,

The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era in the history of the Middle East. In firm conviction thereof, I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments:

- The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security.

- The PLO accepts United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.

- The PLO commits itself to the Middle East peace process, and to a peaceful resolution of the conflict between the two sides and declares that all outstanding issues relating to permanent status will be resolved through negotiations."

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/recogn.html

[Steely Dan]

Before undertaking litigation jihad it's as best to remember the saying 'do not throw stones if you live in glass houses. The Palestinian authority was successfully sued by families of the victims of Palestinian terror. I hope many more follow suit.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/jury-finds-palestinian-authority-plo-liable-for-terrorist-attacks-in-israel-a-decade-ago-1424715529

[DeaconJohn]

I can see the answer..............F&^K OFF!! You Muslim <deleted> eaters!

I don't think that will be the judgement of the ICJ - or whatever international court ultimately decides this case.

Israel is in blatant violation of international law by their occupation of Palestinian territory.

If the Palestinians and their increasing number of supporters worldwide can get the radical Zionists to abandon their objective of ​Eretz Israel ​and live within their 1967 borders, then this court case will have been a success.

It is the only scenario upon which a viable two-state solution can be based. The alternative is continued bloodshed and an inhuman occupation that is turning the whole world against Israel and will have negative effects on Jews wherever they live.

Diaspora Jews are starting to realize this, and they may be the ones who - together with the peace groups within Israel - bring about the downfall of the Zionist zealots who are moving toward a single state with millions of hostile Palestinians who must be killed, driven into neighbouring countries, or kept in bantustans.

There will be no good outcomes for Israel unless they accept their legitimate borders and live within them.

I agree with your sentiments entirely, but a point of order; "their legitimate borders". Israel has never defined its borders. They keep expanding. Most international observers consider the 1967 green line of armistice as the best basis for negotiations. The Palestinians have already magnanimously recognized an Israeli state on land stolen in 1948.

Even in the Balfour Declaration a Jewish State was never mentioned: "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people"... a home, a haven from persecution perhaps, not a homeland.

In that Israel has broken the proviso in the Balfour Declaration "it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine" presumably the British memo is null and void. But the UK has a lot to answer for by allowing the ethnic cleansing, misery and repression heaped upon the resident Palestinian population by the European Zionist colonizers Balfour's government was encouraging.

I wish the Palestinians success in their suing of the British government. It will at least publicize the gross injustice and deceit upon which Israel is founded.

Thanks for the additional information.

This international lawsuit is the latest development in the growing non-violent offensive against the Israeli occupation.

This is clearly the way forward. Just like the BDS movement, whose greatest impact is not and cannot be the economic strangulation of Israel. Nor is this the only or primary goal. Rather, BDS seeks to disrupt the narrative that presents Israel as victimized by the Palestinians, and empower every individual to act upon their outrage at Israel's decades long oppression of the Palestinian People. And this, BDS is doing very well.

[DeaconJohn]

I can see the answer..............F&^K OFF!! You Muslim <deleted> eaters!

I don't think that will be the judgement of the ICJ - or whatever international court ultimately decides this case.

Israel is in blatant violation of international law by their occupation of Palestinian territory.

If the Palestinians and their increasing number of supporters worldwide can get the radical Zionists to abandon their objective of ​Eretz Israel ​and live within their 1967 borders, then this court case will have been a success.

It is the only scenario upon which a viable two-state solution can be based. The alternative is continued bloodshed and an inhuman occupation that is turning the whole world against Israel and will have negative effects on Jews wherever they live.

Diaspora Jews are starting to realize this, and they may be the ones who - together with the peace groups within Israel - bring about the downfall of the Zionist zealots who are moving toward a single state with millions of hostile Palestinians who must be killed, driven into neighbouring countries, or kept in bantustans.

There will be no good outcomes for Israel unless they accept their legitimate borders and live within them.

Oh please. Stop with the blatant disingenuousness. This case is not about 1967 borders or ANY borders. This case is about the toxic real view of the majority of Palestinian Arabs ... that Israel shouldn't have ever existed and shouldn't exist now within ANY borders. So it's a stupid, hateful, destructive, absurd, pointless, destined to fail case.

Get to the table, directly negotiate with Israel fully accepting the existence of Israel, stop inciting terrorism, Hamas stop building invasion tunnels and change the charter away from it's genocidal aims, protest yes but non-violently only ... and then and ONLY then will the Palestinian Arabs actually make any real progress towards the reasonable goal of an independent Palestinian state living side by side with the Jewish state of Israel.

You're quite right, this case is not about Israel's 1967 borders.

But I would suggest that the 1967 borders are the basis for a two-state solution that would be beneficial to both sides.

Israel will never live within those borders as long as the Likudniks and Zionist ​meshugas are in power.

[Jingthing]

BDS, huh?
First of all the BDS movement has happily suffered a lot of setbacks because many civilized governments understand how closely linked the BDS movement is to Jew hatred.

BDS and this absurd lawsuit in the OP have a lot in common.

Both deny the right of Israel to even exist as a Jewish state in ANY borders.

So many people globally are becoming more aware of how deeply and totally the BDS movement has been infected with Jew hatred.

Be clear I am not suggesting every naive person that identifies with BDS is a Jew hater. Certainly not. But the movement is a Jew hating movement ... without any doubt.

http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2014/02/07/3940144.htm

These examples of overt bigotry are bad enough. But even if most BDS advocates identify as opponents of racism, the fact remains that the core agenda of the BDS movement is anti-Semitic. The movement does not seek Israeli/Palestinian peace and reconciliation and/or the enhancement of Palestinian national and human rights by means of a two-state solution. Rather, it seeks to eliminate the existing Jewish State of Israel, and replace it with a new national state dominated by an Arab majority which I have called elsewhere a "Greater Palestine."

This means that the approximately 6.066 million Jews living in Israel, who currently constitute 75.1% of that country, would be completely disenfranchised as a national collective. That is, a country created as a refuge for European Jews who fled or survived Nazi genocide and Middle Eastern Jews who were ethnically cleansed en masse from the Arab world would suddenly cease to exist. At best, many Israeli Jews might become refugees joining the long queue to seek asylum all over the globe. At worst, they could suffer mass violence and genocide. But, according to the BDS movement, these outcomes would advance human rights rather than anti-Jewish racism.

Edited July 27, 2016 by Jingthing

[Cats4ever]

Looks like we have a few people with the "rapture" on their minds. Negotiating with Israel (possibly excepting the assassinated PM) leads nowhere. Obviously the concept of adverse possession does not exist in the Torah. The nutcase settlers, who are claiming a biblical title to land that they abandoned after Masada, is staggering.

[daveAustin]

Wouldn't they be better off trying to sue Israel from going over the lines rather than this airy fairy nonsense?

Apologies to the good folk, but thinking a lot of problems could be sorted by accidentally putting to use a portion of the world's nukes and levelling the entire peninsula right across to the Indian border. It would upset the nutcases in Europe, but they are already up for it. Somalia and Egypt (minus pyramids) could also have some.

[geriatrickid]

Dexterm, your anti Israel sentiments are playing to an even smaller audience now. Perhaps you should channel your propaganda and revisionist arguments towards your friends who have a rather horrid PR problem in the EU, with their bombings and beheadings.

[Jingthing]

Looks like we have a few people with the "rapture" on their minds. Negotiating with Israel (possibly excepting the assassinated PM) leads nowhere. Obviously the concept of adverse possession does not exist in the Torah. The nutcase settlers, who are claiming a biblical title to land that they abandoned after Masada, is staggering.

The Israeli government is not the same thing as the Torah. Not commenting on your negative view of the Torah as I really wouldn't know. In any case the political will for a negotiated two state solution is lacking on both sides. Sadly. Edited July 27, 2016 by Jingthing

[coma]

Good luck to them. They sure do have a case. Who were the Brits and co anyway to be giving away Arab land to the Jews anyway ? The Jewish state should have been erected on current day Germany. They lost the war not Britain. And most of the present day Jews residing in Israel came from, or are direct descendants of German/ European Jews. Not Middle Eastern Jews.

Never really could get my head around how that decision A] Came about and B] The United Nations allowed it to happen. Disgraceful blip on modern day history. The world is at war today because of it. Fess up to it or not. The world would have been much better/nicer place today had the Brits and co not given Arab land to the Jews to create Israel where she stands now.

[Baerboxer]

Just shows how deluded some so called Palestinians are, crazy

I wouldn't say crazy but more like further proof (as if we needed it) that there is no political will there to actually seek a REALISTIC solution based on today's realities ... with ISRAEL.

They don't even accept Israel's right to exist or live peacefully. How can they expect meaningful discussions when that's there standpoint?

If this idiot of a President cared to do some research he'll find out that Britain was given a mandate following the defeat and collapse of the Ottoman Empire, who were ruling that land. The British presented the suggested solutions to the League of Nations who duly approved.

Perhaps he should try suing Turkey as the new Ottomans, or the Italians because those Romans invaded.

Without laboring a point, how many years ago, way before the first or second world wars, way before Pontius Pilate, did the Jewish people live in that land?

The Palestinians could have had a very prosperous and pleasant state a long time ago - only certain other "powers" won't let them decide to follow that course.

[DaddyWarbucks]

Looks like we have a few people with the "rapture" on their minds. Negotiating with Israel (possibly excepting the assassinated PM) leads nowhere. Obviously the concept of adverse possession does not exist in the Torah. The nutcase settlers, who are claiming a biblical title to land that they abandoned after Masada, is staggering.

The Israeli government is not the same thing as the Torah. Not commenting on your negative view of the Torah as I really wouldn't know. In any case the political will for a negotiated two state solution is lacking on both sides. Sadly.

The political will for a negotiated two-state solution may be lacking on both sides, but it is the Israelis who are building illegal settlements and grabbing Palestinian land.

Until that situation is resolved the stalemate will continue.

Live within your legitimate internationally recognized 1967 borders and have the courage to get out of this bloody quagmire.

[Baerboxer]

Good luck to them. They sure do have a case. Who were the Brits and co anyway to be giving away Arab land to the Jews anyway ? The Jewish state should have been erected on current day Germany. They lost the war not Britain. And most of the present day Jews residing in Israel came from, or are direct descendants of German/ European Jews. Not Middle Eastern Jews.

Never really could get my head around how that decision A] Came about and B] The United Nations allowed it to happen. Disgraceful blip on modern day history. The world is at war today because of it. Fess up to it or not. The world would have been much better/nicer place today had the Brits and co not given Arab land to the Jews to create Israel where she stands now.

First you need to read a bit about the history of the Jewish people, their origins and historical geographical residence. Then read about the Ottomans. Then the aftermath of WW1; how British and French diplomats redrew ME boundaries as the Ottoman Empire was no more, including the British mandate given by the League of Nations for Palestine; the British suggestions accepted and approved by the League of Nations (there was no UN then, this is the fore runner).

The world would be a different place - no idea if better or nicer if the Romans hadn't invaded that land, if the crusaders had managed things differently, if the Kaiser hadn't contrived to start WW1, if Hitler hadn't nurtured the holocaust, if Stalin other soviet states hadn't persecuted Jews.

World wars create displaced peoples. The French screwed up Indo-China, which led eventually to the Viet Nam war, dragging the US in and causing bombings of Laos (illegally) and creating the conditions for the Khmer Rouge to commit genocide in Cambodia.

Yes, the world would be better in hindsight. No Roman, Spanish, French, British, Mongol or Japanese Empires. No stealing of land and whole countries from indigenous peoples - so no USA, no Australia, no Canada, no South Africa, and no New Zealand. Brazil, Aregentina, Peru etc all stolen by the Spanish and Portugal.

How many "wrongs" form the past do you want to put right? And who decides what's right?

[dexterm]

Dexterm, your anti Israel sentiments are playing to an even smaller audience now. Perhaps you should channel your propaganda and revisionist arguments towards your friends who have a rather horrid PR problem in the EU, with their bombings and beheadings.

I am not anti Israel. I am anti racist supremacist Zionism, the fanatics who believe they have a god given right to dispossess resident Palestinians and steal their land.

I wish no harm to Israeli Jews, Israeli Palestinians, nor the 5 million indigenous Palestinians within Palestine. They will all share the country one day anyway. It's a geographic inevitability.

If you are referring to the barbaric scum ISIS as my friends, you are mistaken. I loathe all bullies, and I hope they get their comeuppance soon.

[Baerboxer]

The audacity of the Brit Balfour to give away someone else's land to a bunch of European Zionist colonizers whose intention was to dispossess the resident Palestinian population is incredible. And the UK at the time, not having even won the war yet, were giving away land that did not even belong to them by any stretch of international law, let alone of morality.

Crap. The Ottoman Empire, that had occupied and ruled that land had collapsed. Britain and France redrew the boundaries in the ME and created new countries. That was discussed and agreed at the then new League of Nations.

Certain areas fell under British influence, certain under French.

Where did the Jewish people originate? When was there previously a country called Palestine, governed by the Palestinian people as an independent country?

After a major war, and WW1 was the most significant war up to that time, many peoples were displaced, boundaries were redrew, and some of the issues since can be traced back to that. Or you can go even further back too. Some countries disappeared, new ones appeared. Some people were expelled from the area where they lived and became citizens of different countries based on ethnicity, whilst some notably the Armenians suffered a genocide as the Turks tried to exterminate them.

This wasn't a back of a fag packet, one man deciding, as you like to suggest. It was the powers that won WWI trying to implement solutions they, and the newly formed League of nations, thought sensible and probably expedient at the time.

Edited July 27, 2016 by Baerboxer

[dexterm]

Good luck to them. They sure do have a case. Who were the Brits and co anyway to be giving away Arab land to the Jews anyway ? The Jewish state should have been erected on current day Germany. They lost the war not Britain. And most of the present day Jews residing in Israel came from, or are direct descendants of German/ European Jews. Not Middle Eastern Jews.

Never really could get my head around how that decision A] Came about and B] The United Nations allowed it to happen. Disgraceful blip on modern day history. The world is at war today because of it. Fess up to it or not. The world would have been much better/nicer place today had the Brits and co not given Arab land to the Jews to create Israel where she stands now.

First you need to read a bit about the history of the Jewish people, their origins and historical geographical residence. Then read about the Ottomans. Then the aftermath of WW1; how British and French diplomats redrew ME boundaries as the Ottoman Empire was no more, including the British mandate given by the League of Nations for Palestine; the British suggestions accepted and approved by the League of Nations (there was no UN then, this is the fore runner).

The world would be a different place - no idea if better or nicer if the Romans hadn't invaded that land, if the crusaders had managed things differently, if the Kaiser hadn't contrived to start WW1, if Hitler hadn't nurtured the holocaust, if Stalin other soviet states hadn't persecuted Jews.

World wars create displaced peoples. The French screwed up Indo-China, which led eventually to the Viet Nam war, dragging the US in and causing bombings of Laos (illegally) and creating the conditions for the Khmer Rouge to commit genocide in Cambodia.

Yes, the world would be better in hindsight. No Roman, Spanish, French, British, Mongol or Japanese Empires. No stealing of land and whole countries from indigenous peoples - so no USA, no Australia, no Canada, no South Africa, and no New Zealand. Brazil, Aregentina, Peru etc all stolen by the Spanish and Portugal.

How many "wrongs" form the past do you want to put right? And who decides what's right?

I can appreciate your criticism of historical colonization projects that inflicted untold misery on indigenous populations world wide. In the light of today's morality, what they did was clearly wrong. Ex European colonialist governments in most of the countries you mention have on the whole recognized that.

The problem for Israel and Zionism is that it left its colonial enterprise about 100 years too late, and to compound all that, they are still at it expanding their colonies in the West Bank, in a complete state of denial, without acknowledging what they have done to the local Palestinian population, let alone apologizing and compensating for their crimes.

The point is that in the 21st Century where we now have the Geneva Convention, International Laws, and UN and the social media watching you, you can't behave like Ghengis Khan and get away with it any more. But Israel seems to think it can.

Getting back to the OP. The Balfour Declaration was not just a favour for a friend Lord Rothschild. It was a surrogate colonial enterprise by the British Government to plant a colony of what they hoped would be a pro British Jewish people in the Middle East close to the Suez Canal and their Empire.

Fascinating background to the topic at

http://www.balfourproject.org

[dexterm]

The audacity of the Brit Balfour to give away someone else's land to a bunch of European Zionist colonizers whose intention was to dispossess the resident Palestinian population is incredible. And the UK at the time, not having even won the war yet, were giving away land that did not even belong to them by any stretch of international law, let alone of morality.

Crap. The Ottoman Empire, that had occupied and ruled that land had collapsed. Britain and France redrew the boundaries in the ME and created new countries. That was discussed and agreed at the then new League of Nations.

Certain areas fell under British influence, certain under French.

Where did the Jewish people originate? When was there previously a country called Palestine, governed by the Palestinian people as an independent country?

After a major war, and WW1 was the most significant war up to that time, many peoples were displaced, boundaries were redrew, and some of the issues since can be traced back to that. Or you can go even further back too. Some countries disappeared, new ones appeared. Some people were expelled from the area where they lived and became citizens of different countries based on ethnicity, whilst some notably the Armenians suffered a genocide as the Turks tried to exterminate them.

This wasn't a back of a fag packet, one man deciding, as you like to suggest. It was the powers that won WWI trying to implement solutions they, and the newly formed League of nations, thought sensible and probably expedient at the time.

Your last paragraph betrays your ignorance of the history of the Middle East...just look at all the straight lines on the map cutting through ethnic, tribal, religious, and political loyalties.

And your belief that UK and France were somehow benign caretakers is ludicrously naive. Just as today, world super powers then acted purely in what they perceived to be their own self interests, not those of the people they invaded and conquered.

I suggest you read

http://www.balfourproject.org/balfour-and-palestine/

to understand the deceit, Zionist lobbying, and British colonial self interest which formed the background to the Balfour Declaratiion.