[W:534] Ben Gurion On The Reaction Of The Arabs To The Creation Of Israel

[craig]

The truly powerful hold their position because of their intelligence, example, fairness, adherence to the law and respect of others.
Massacre and theft are just bullying.

Make Israel the 51st state and them we can talk.

 

[weaver2]

Make Israel the 51st state and them we can talk.

We already have too many states wracked and wrecked by religious idiots who have the true word and a burning need to impose it on others with their religious laws and mucking about in politics.

 

[VanceMack]

So, civilization hasn't progressed in 3500 years and it is perfectly OK to ignore international courts, massacre people and take their land. Good to know. So should the local tribes kill your family and take over your home your thoughts will be "ah, well that just the way borders are formed" One country ignoring international law means every country can also ignore it.

You are pissing yourself...Im just discussing historical facts. Perhaps your hatred of Jews has you imbalanced.

 

[Chagos]

The land was significantly owned by Palestinians and had been owned as fiefdoms for centuries. "A fief ..... consisted of heritable property or rights granted by an overlord to a vassal who held it in fealty (or "in fee") in return for a form of feudal allegiance and service, usually given by the personal ceremonies of homage and fealty. The fees were often lands or revenue-producing real property held in feudal land tenure." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fief This describes exactly how the land was held by Palestinians during the Ottoman Empire.

Takes nothing from what I said over the the lands in question never having been significantly owned by any Palestinians either, certainly not to any extent that would have constituted Palestinian rule.

Note the bolded.

and in any case, you're contradicting your previous statement now of the lands having been owned by wealthy Turkic families. Which, where true in its largest part, does not cover it all, seeing how some absentee landlords were Arabs residing in Cairo, Damascus and elsewhere all the way to Istanbul.

Besides all of which a fiefdom is NOT ownership, no matter how you try to spin it.

"
“The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitates Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in cooperation with the Jewish Agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes”.

This in no way means the heritable fiefs of the Palestinian's were "public" or "free" land.

Looks like that's what they became under Mandate rule though. We can argue backwards and forwards whether that delineation was just, what it was NOT though was confiscation (at least in majority of instances) of lands belonging to Palestinian farmers.

Since (see above) those lands held no such ownership tag.

Yes, it is what it is. However that doesn't mean that Deir Yassin is a legitimate occupations of land nobody owned

I'm not arguing the atrocity of Deir Yassin (and other instances) and don't think anyone in their right mind could.

But it cannot be applied in any sense of generalization to Israel overall, even in those times.

any more than the Trail of Tears was a legitimate way to acquire valuable Indian farm lands in the South. Both are nothing more massacres of the legitimate owners of the land.

If you want to argue the plight of the Cherokees, Cree and others, do it in the appropriate forum.

 

[Chagos]

So, civilization hasn't progressed in 3500 years and it is perfectly OK to ignore international courts, massacre people and take their land. Good to know. So should the local tribes kill your family and take over your home your thoughts will be "ah, well that just the way borders are formed" One country ignoring international law means every country can also ignore it.

Define "international law" while you're at it, please.

 

[weaver2]

Define "international law" while you're at it, please.

When I don't know something I go to Wikipedia first, inform myself, then use the reference lists to refine my understanding. But here's the thing. I think you already know what international law is. You just want to deflect the discussion away from Zionism and into a conversation about radical left wing, Soros funded, unpatriotic, freedom hating Democrats that want to destroy America with international law and the UN and I think I'll just opt out of your game.

Oh BTW You might to look up Cree. You have them mixed up with the Creek.

 

[Chagos]

When I don't know something I go to Wikipedia first, inform myself, then use the reference lists to refine my understanding. But here's the thing. I think you already know what international law is.

Yes, I do in knowing that there's no such thing that can be applied to all parties or nations if there is an absence of treaties (read signatories to same).

You just want to deflect the discussion away from Zionism and into a conversation about radical left wing, Soros funded, unpatriotic, freedom hating Democrats that want to destroy America with international law and the UN and I think I'll just opt out of your game.

That's an amusing but also totally dishonest way of deflecting from your ignorance. But running from the challenge remains just that, running. Using straw man tactics is one of its more pathetic forms.

Oh BTW You might to look up Cree. You have them mixed up with the Creek.

Indeed my bad, nevertheless both tribes (the more Northern and the more South Eastern) don't belong in here.

But thank you for confirming that your idea of debate appears to be veiling your obvious incapacity at it in a load of unrelated (to the topic) bovine manure.

 

[weaver2]

Yes, I do in knowing that there's no such thing that can be applied to all parties or nations if there is an absence of treaties (read signatories to same).

There, you see, you did know. So why did you ask if it wasn't to deflect?

That's an amusing but also totally dishonest way of deflecting from your ignorance. But running from the challenge remains just that, running. Using straw man tactics is one of its more pathetic forms.

I wasn't aware of a challenge. I said that the Palestinian's didn't hold deeds to the land they had been farming.

Indeed my bad, nevertheless both tribes (the more Northern and the more South Eastern) don't belong in here.

What do you mean by "don't belong in here" ? The Creek were one of the tribes driven out of the Southeastern for their farmlands.That's pretty much what the Zionists did to the Palestinians. The comparison stands.

But thank you for confirming that your idea of debate appears to be veiling your obvious incapacity at it in a load of unrelated (to the topic) bovine manure.

There isn't any debate. The discussion topic is "Ben Gurion On The Reaction Of The Arabs To The Creation Of Israel"
You think armed Zionists in 1948 had a right to take over Arab villages, land water and chase out or kill the residents and I don't. I think what the Zionists did and continue to do today is counter to the laws the UN's created in an attempt at world peace.

It would seem that people with anencephaly get anxious when encountering an opposing opinion. Apparently calling everything bullshit relieves this anxiety. You should try yoga for anxiety instead of calling attention to your sad little brain.

 

[oneworld2]

Hankie?

I suggest that you will need it before I ever do. It can also serve as your white flag don't forget.

 

[Chagos]

There, you see, you did know. So why did you ask if it wasn't to deflect?

To demonstrate (not that it was really necessary) that you didn't know what the heck you were talking about when evoking the term of "international law".

I wasn't aware of a challenge. I said that the Palestinian's didn't hold deeds to the land they had been farming.

Nice try and as futile and dishonest as most of what you've presented so far as your idea of debate.

What do you mean by "don't belong in here" ? The Creek were one of the tribes driven out of the Southeastern for their farmlands.That's pretty much what the Zionists did to the Palestinians. The comparison stands.

Clearly you do not understand the significance of certain forums being designed to deal with precisely the geographical and historical location that they refer to.

There isn't any debate.

obviously with you NOT

The discussion topic is "Ben Gurion On The Reaction Of The Arabs To The Creation Of Israel"

Yes? And?

You think armed Zionists in 1948 had a right to take over Arab villages, land water and chase out or kill the residents

You have not the slightest idea what I think on the matter and reverting to your own ludicrous fantasies is not the way out of that failing.

and I don't. I think what the Zionists did and continue to do today is counter to the laws the UN's created in an attempt at world peace.

Just a further demonstration of your ignorance, seeing how the UN does not create laws.

It would seem that people with anencephaly get anxious when encountering an opposing opinion. Apparently calling everything bullshit relieves this anxiety. You should try yoga. It doesn't leave your little C. Japonica exposed for everyone to see.

So, when you get yourself stuck in the fabric of your own inane and totally fallacious claims, you see your only way out of having demonstrated your utter ignorance in resorting to personal insults?

I wouldn't call that a very adult approach to debate and, consequently, wouldn't call you a very qualified candidate for the same.

 

[oneworld2]

DEBATE Politics....

Not ACCUSE Politics.

You also overestimate your ability to make people laugh, at least in a comedic intent. You people are the ones hiding behind accusations of antisemitism and Holocaust denial. Obviously you are as bad as the other poster when it comes to self awareness

 

[Fledermaus]

I suggest that you will need it before I ever do. It can also serve as your white flag don't forget.

Why would anyone surrender to you?

Black Knighting isn't winning.

 

[Fledermaus]

You also overestimate your ability to make people laugh, at least in a comedic intent. You people are the ones hiding behind accusations of antisemitism and Holocaust denial. Obviously you are as bad as the other poster when it comes to self awareness

Accusation =/= Debate

 

[oneworld2]

Accusation =/= Debate

Yep, that's what you have had to resort to throughout. Just another day for you on debate politics from which you are never away .

 

[oneworld2]

Why would anyone surrender to you?

Black Knighting isn't winning.

The false accusations you and your lackies have been compelled to resort to, straw men arguments, etc etc ARE a white flag of sorts, the flag that signals that debate is just a bridge too far for you

 

[Fledermaus]

Yep, that's what you have had to resort to throughout. Just another day for you on debate politics from which you are never away .

And more accusation...

No debate.

And for all you whine about people being off topic you seem to have dropped that charade once it was shown that Ben Gurion's reaction wasn't actuality en Gurion's words....

Hmmmmm

And that his actual words don't mirror the "reaction" in your OP.

 

[Fledermaus]

The false accusations you and your lackies have been compelled to resort to, straw men arguments, etc etc ARE a white flag of sorts, the flag that signals that debate is just a bridge too far for you

More accusation.... And Black Knighting...

You just can't help yourself.

 

[oneworld2]

Cant speak for anyone else, but Ive said all this, all along.

Its why there will never be peace between Israel and Palestine.

The OP seems to look at 'recent' history where Israel reclaimed their homeland as being improper...evil. OK...but was it improper when the Jews were driven from the land Jerusalem and the Palestinians eventually laid claim to the land Israel (there is a distinction BTW between Israel and the land Israel). Jews always lived in Palestine.

The battle is one that goes on for 3700 years. The Palestinians were ousted from the leadership roles in Israel by the Jewish resettlement of Israel...an action Jews feel was justified as the restoration of their lands.

Who is right? They both are. But the reality is you could have this discussion in every country on the globe as all borders were at one time or another formed through conquest.

Peace between Israel and Palestine can be made possible if the USA stopped using its UNSC veto to block the overwhelming world consensus for a two state solution.

The recent advent of the UN Charter, 4th Geneva Convention etc as a base for international law is aimed at stopping th waging of wars and thus should be supported by the people of all nations.

I am not opposed to the creation of a state for Jewish people, I am opposed to the ethnic cleansing of others to achieve it. It is noticeable that the main world players that support the state of Israel and thus it's racist policies against Arabs are themselves the result of settler colonial exploitation of an indigenous people

 

[oneworld2]

And more accusation...

No debate.

And for all you whine about people being off topic you seem to have dropped that charade once it was shown that Ben Gurion's reaction wasn't actuality en Gurion's words....

Hmmmmm

And that his actual words don't mirror the "reaction" in your OP.

Of course you do wrong at a professional level so your comment above should be read in that context. All but one quote cannot be absolutely verified and even that doesn't mean it isn't true. Other quotes confirm the position of the OP and that's why they were not addressed by the detractors. Obvious avoidance as is expected from people like yourself and the others here like you.

In fact you couldn't/refused to even comment on one of them even after repeated requests to do so................ thus confirming what I say about how it is yourself and others like you here that have hidden from debate by deploying falsehoods and distractions....................you then perform the obligatory projection. SOSAD everytime

 

[Fledermaus]

Of course you do wrong at a professional level so your comment above should be read in that context. All but one quote cannot be absolutely verified and even that doesn't mean it isn't true. Other quotes confirm the position of the OP and that's why they were not addressed by the detractors. Obvious avoidance as is expected from people like yourself and the others here like you.

In fact you couldn't/refused to even comment on one of them even after repeated requests to do so................ thus confirming what I say about how it is yourself and others like you here that have hidden from debate by deploying falsehoods and distractions....................you then perform the obligatory projection. SOSAD everytime

And another post primarily directed at me and only tangentially at the OP...

SOSAD.... You can't even be original.

 

[Chagos]

That the US blocks a two state solution is just the usual ignorant (if indeed not dishonest) bilge one has become used to seeing on here.

Anyone interested in perusing actual fact will see that the US is actually arguing that the associated border issue be negotiated between the two parties (Israel and Palestinians), rather than reverting to the borders before the Six Day War.

The attempt to show the US as opposing the two state solution fails (as usual).

 

[VanceMack]

Peace between Israel and Palestine can be made possible if the USA stopped using its UNSC veto to block the overwhelming world consensus for a two state solution.

The recent advent of the UN Charter, 4th Geneva Convention etc as a base for international law is aimed at stopping th waging of wars and thus should be supported by the people of all nations.

I am not opposed to the creation of a state for Jewish people, I am opposed to the ethnic cleansing of others to achieve it. It is noticeable that the main world players that support the state of Israel and thus it's racist policies against Arabs are themselves the result of settler colonial exploitation of an indigenous people

You cant really believe that.

Palestinians believe peace will come when Israel is no more. Not surprisingly...thats your goal as well.

 

[oneworld2]

You cant really believe that.

Palestinians believe peace will come when Israel is no more. Not surprisingly...thats your goal as well.

Sure it's possible and the US is standing in the way of the international consensus that has been solid for around 40 odd years. Not sure how you work out that someone who has been a consistent advocate of the two state solution somehow wants there to be no Israeli state. I suppose if you got nothing you just have to ceate something and a straw man is better than nothing for those who struggle with a debate, which would be yourself btw.

 

[oneworld2]

And another post primarily directed at me and only tangentially at the OP...

SOSAD.... You can't even be original.

Projection,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,as is obvious to any that have followed this or are the least bit familiar with your content

 

[VanceMack]

Sure it's possible and the US is standing in the way of the international consensus that has been solid for around 40 odd years. Not sure how you work out that someone who has been a consistent advocate of the two state solution somehow wants there to be no Israeli state. I suppose if you got nothing you just have to ceate something and a straw man is better than nothing for those who struggle with a debate, which would be yourself btw.

No..its not. Start with the foundation of the concept. Who stays where and which side will find that solution palatable. Then if you have any integrity whatsoever you have to be honest about the Palestinians intent to kill Israel. That doesnt magically go away.

You simply arent being honest.