Palestinians to sue Britain over 1917 pledge on Jewish state

[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.

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

I may be a lot of things. But I am not greedy. I just want this problem fixed.

[dexterm]

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.

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

...wrong! See Arafat's 1993 recognition of Israel's right to exist above in the thread. We are still waiting for Israel to reciprocate.

>>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.

..it was not all quite as altruistic as you claim. Powerful Zionists had for years been lobbying the British government, Chaim Weizmann in particular...Englishman and first President of Israel, and the first British High Commissioner of Palestine was the ardent Zionist Herbert Samuel, like putting the fox in charge of the hen house if according to the Balfour Declaration he was supposed to safeguard "the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"...he even proposed building a Jewish Temple on the 3rd holiest Muslim site in Jerusalem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Samuel,_1st_Viscount_Samuel

And of course Balfour himself was an evangelical Christian who thought he might be hastening the Second Coming by encouraging Jews to migrate

>>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?

... people who practised the religion Judaism lived for a while in Palestine. So did lots of other peoples. The Bible is not a real estate title deed. Jews are a religion not a race.

Your logic would dictate that all Buddhists have a right to occupy Nepal and India, where Lord Buddha was born and achieved enlightenment, or all Christians have a right to occupy the Holy Land, Christ's birthplace.

>>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.

..Palestinians have been hamstrung by dominant colonial powers throughout their history..the Ottomans, the British, corrupt Arab autocrats, the Zionists with US and UK support.

Their flag is now flying outside the UN, their state is now recognized by 70% of the world's countries, and they are now suing the British governemnt for all the harm that has been inflicted upon them denying them a prosperous and pleasant state that was duplicitously promised them by McMahon but betrayed by Balfour in 2 completely contradictory pledges.

http://www.balfourproject.org/the-mcmahon-promise/

[Grouse]

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

Sleazy! How dare you sir! Step outside!

[MisterTee]

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

Sleazy! How dare you sir! Step outside!

Don't be facetious, it's uncalled for.

The post you are making fun of is one of the best on the thread.

If you don't agree with him, maybe you could refute some of his points.

[Grouse]

Bloody Israel has to shoulder some responsibility for the negative feelings most Muslims feel towards Western countries.

Best not open that can of worms right now

Personally, I would prefer refugees to head South not North.

[Grouse]

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

Sleazy! How dare you sir! Step outside!

Don't be facetious, it's uncalled for.

The post you are making fun of is one of the best on the thread.

If you don't agree with him, maybe you could refute some of his points.

Balfour may have been aloof but he was certainly urbane.

Why was he sleazy?

The declaration was not even prepared by him.

Ironically, his main aim was to stop Jews coming to the UK. Just the same as many want to stop Muslims now.

I will refrain from humour in all matters concerning Israel from now on .....(tee! hee!)

[Grouse]

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

Sleazy! How dare you sir! Step outside!

Don't be facetious, it's uncalled for.

The post you are making fun of is one of the best on the thread.

If you don't agree with him, maybe you could refute some of his points.

Balfour may have been aloof but he was certainly urbane.

Why was he sleazy?

The declaration was not even prepared by him.

Ironically, his main aim was to stop Jews coming to the UK. Just the same as many want to stop Muslims now.

I will refrain from humour in all matters concerning Israel from now on .....(tee! hee!)

[Ulysses G.]

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.

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

From YOUR same source:

Under the Ottoman Empire (1517-1917), the term Palestine was used as a general term to describe the land south of Syria; it was not an official designation. In fact, many Ottomans and Arabs who lived in Palestine during this time period referred to the area as "Southern Syria" and not as "Palestine."

After World War I, the name "Palestine" was applied to the territory that was placed under British Mandate; this area included not only present-day Israel but also present-day Jordan.

Leading up to Israel's independence in 1948, it was common for the international press to label Jews, not Arabs, living in the mandate as Palestinians. It was not until years after Israeli independence that the Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip were called Palestinians. In fact, Arabs cannot even correctly pronounce the word Palestine in their native tongue, referring to area rather as“Filastin.”

The word Palestine or Filastin does not appear in the Koran. The term peleshet appears in the Jewish Tanakh no fewer than 250 times.

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

Facts are facts, no matter how you try to distort them.

Edited July 27, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[thaihome]

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.

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

...wrong! See Arafat's 1993 recognition of Israel's right to exist above in the thread. We are still waiting for Israel to reciprocate.

>>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.

..it was not all quite as altruistic as you claim. Powerful Zionists had for years been lobbying the British government, Chaim Weizmann in particular...Englishman and first President of Israel, and the first British High Commissioner of Palestine was the ardent Zionist Herbert Samuel, like putting the fox in charge of the hen house if according to the Balfour Declaration he was supposed to safeguard "the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"...he even proposed building a Jewish Temple on the 3rd holiest Muslim site in Jerusalem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Samuel,_1st_Viscount_Samuel

And of course Balfour himself was an evangelical Christian who thought he might be hastening the Second Coming by encouraging Jews to migrate

>>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?

... people who practised the religion Judaism lived for a while in Palestine. So did lots of other peoples. The Bible is not a real estate title deed. Jews are a religion not a race.

Your logic would dictate that all Buddhists have a right to occupy Nepal and India, where Lord Buddha was born and achieved enlightenment, or all Christians have a right to occupy the Holy Land, Christ's birthplace.

>>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.

..Palestinians have been hamstrung by dominant colonial powers throughout their history..the Ottomans, the British, corrupt Arab autocrats, the Zionists with US and UK support.

Their flag is now flying outside the UN, their state is now recognized by 70% of the world's countries, and they are now suing the British governemnt for all the harm that has been inflicted upon them denying them a prosperous and pleasant state that was duplicitously promised them by McMahon but betrayed by Balfour in 2 completely contradictory pledges.

http://www.balfourproject.org/the-mcmahon-promise/

You make a very logical, rational argument, but it seems to hinge on your statement buried deep in side your post that "Jews are a religion not a race". This may be true, and is even agreed with by the majority of the Jewish diaspora, but history, prior to 1945, shows that non Jews did not agree with this and the pograms all over the world that culminated with the Holocaust to wipe out the "Jewish race" show this. The formation of the state of Israel in 1948 by UN resolution was an attempt to ease the collective guilt of the "winners" of WWII who basicly did nothing to stop or even mitigate the holocaust.

But that is all water under the bridge at this point and discussions to place historical blame for situation today are pointless and actually counterproductive.

Many chances to solve the issue have been wasted over the past 70 years. Blame for this is fairly equal on both sides.

But in my opinion, Israel is going to have to take the initiative and deal with the west bank settlements that have been allowed for short term internal political gains. Until an Israeli leader emerges that is willing to address this there is little hope for a settlement.

At the same time, a Palestinian leader is going to have to emerge that is willing to forgo the significant personal gains that come from stoking the fires of resentment and reach out to his Israeli counterpart to arrive at a settlement that will not make the radicals happy.

The one hope I hold out as an example is Ireland. This was an issue that had gone on much longer then the Israeli/Palestinian problem and as late as 15 years ago seemed intractable. All it took was courageous leaders on both sides to make the necessary concessions and before anyone realized it was happening, the whole thing was over.

I do not see similar leaders on either side coming forward in our generation or even the next. Gerry Adams was a 4th (or maybe 5th) generation IRA supporter. None of his predecessors would have dared to attempt to negotiate a peace accord. It took over a hundred years for a leader courageous enough to arise and to happen at the same time that a UK PM was in power that was willing to talk at the same time.

All the hyperbole and demogoary from both sides sides will never solve the problem. It only makes it worse, hardens people position, and gets in the way of real solutions.

I doubt we will see a resolution in our lifetime, but that does not mean it is unattainable some day.

My first and only rant in a Israeli/Palestinian thread. It won't happen again.?

TH

[Ulysses G.]

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.

Baloney. Tell it to someone who has not been reading your deceitful, hate-filled posts about Israel for many years.

[arjunadawn]

Whats the 'standing' to file this? There was equally no Palestinian State then.

[Ulysses G.]

There was equally no Palestinian State then.

That's a FACT Jack!

[Scott]

Off-topic post and reply removed.

[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.

Baloney. Tell it to someone who has not been reading your deceitful, hate-filled posts about Israel for many years.

The deceit lies with you in not quoting my words in full distorting my post, which I believe is against forum rules.

I actually said "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."

[dexterm]

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.

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

From YOUR same source:

Under the Ottoman Empire (1517-1917), the term Palestine was used as a general term to describe the land south of Syria; it was not an official designation. In fact, many Ottomans and Arabs who lived in Palestine during this time period referred to the area as "Southern Syria" and not as "Palestine."

After World War I, the name "Palestine" was applied to the territory that was placed under British Mandate; this area included not only present-day Israel but also present-day Jordan.

Leading up to Israel's independence in 1948, it was common for the international press to label Jews, not Arabs, living in the mandate as Palestinians. It was not until years after Israeli independence that the Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip were called Palestinians. In fact, Arabs cannot even correctly pronounce the word Palestine in their native tongue, referring to area rather as“Filastin.”

The word Palestine or Filastin does not appear in the Koran. The term peleshet appears in the Jewish Tanakh no fewer than 250 times.

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

Facts are facts, no matter how you try to distort them.

Your obsessive fixation with the name Palestine is completely irrelevant to the peace process.

Negotiators are hardly going to sit around a table armed with dictionaries and gazeteers discussing linguistics, rather than the fate of 4.5 million Palestinian refugees and the gradual drifting of Israel into a one state solution..

Let's start dealing with 21st century reality, not high school debating society historical semantics.

[Chicog]

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.

Unfortunately Israel would use it as an opportunity to walk all over them.

[dick dasterdly]

You make a very logical, rational argument, but it seems to hinge on your statement buried deep in side your post that "Jews are a religion not a race". This may be true, and is even agreed with by the majority of the Jewish diaspora, but history, prior to 1945, shows that non Jews did not agree with this and the pograms all over the world that culminated with the Holocaust to wipe out the "Jewish race" show this. The formation of the state of Israel in 1948 by UN resolution was an attempt to ease the collective guilt of the "winners" of WWII who basicly did nothing to stop or even mitigate the holocaust.

But that is all water under the bridge at this point and discussions to place historical blame for situation today are pointless and actually counterproductive.

Many chances to solve the issue have been wasted over the past 70 years. Blame for this is fairly equal on both sides.

But in my opinion, Israel is going to have to take the initiative and deal with the west bank settlements that have been allowed for short term internal political gains. Until an Israeli leader emerges that is willing to address this there is little hope for a settlement.

At the same time, a Palestinian leader is going to have to emerge that is willing to forgo the significant personal gains that come from stoking the fires of resentment and reach out to his Israeli counterpart to arrive at a settlement that will not make the radicals happy.

The one hope I hold out as an example is Ireland. This was an issue that had gone on much longer then the Israeli/Palestinian problem and as late as 15 years ago seemed intractable. All it took was courageous leaders on both sides to make the necessary concessions and before anyone realized it was happening, the whole thing was over.

I do not see similar leaders on either side coming forward in our generation or even the next. Gerry Adams was a 4th (or maybe 5th) generation IRA supporter. None of his predecessors would have dared to attempt to negotiate a peace accord. It took over a hundred years for a leader courageous enough to arise and to happen at the same time that a UK PM was in power that was willing to talk at the same time.

All the hyperbole and demogoary from both sides sides will never solve the problem. It only makes it worse, hardens people position, and gets in the way of real solutions.

I doubt we will see a resolution in our lifetime, but that does not mean it is unattainable some day.

My first and only rant in a Israeli/Palestinian thread. It won't happen again.?

TH

Thank you for that sensible and pragmatic post - far too rare on these threads.

[Ulysses G.]

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.

Baloney. Tell it to someone who has not been reading your deceitful, hate-filled posts about Israel for many years.

The deceit lies with you in not quoting my words in full distorting my post, which I believe is against forum rules.

Wrong as usual. I quoted the statement that I am addressing. I am not required to repeat a bunch of duplicitous spin. Edited July 28, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

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.

Baloney. Tell it to someone who has not been reading your deceitful, hate-filled posts about Israel for many years.

The deceit lies with you in not quoting my words in full distorting my post, which I believe is against forum rules.

Wrong as usual. I quoted the statement that I am addressing directly. I am not required to repeat a bunch of duplicitous spin. Edited July 28, 2016 by Ulysses G.