[W:4]Are the Jewish Israelis eventually going to push all of the Palestinians out?

[NO1]

I really don't care what you " feel things" are or not. I have provided the quotes before with the links to support them ( you only need go to the wiki 6 Day War page for some of them ) and you are aware of them because you were active in the debate at the time

Ok. Anyway, as I said Dayan was the one which said days before the war started that there will be thousands dead if Israel will wait and not respond to the acts of aggression of Nasser. He said it will be a fatal mistake. I guess you quote whatever align with you propaganda...

 

[NO1]

Many people travel to other places so as to work and many, as Finkelstein showed when he dumped Joan Peters junk about the same thing, do it on a temporary basis. Eitherway, your claim that there are no indigenous Palestinians remains baseless despite your ongoing attempts at misrepresentation and illogical analysis

My claim was: many Palestinians arabs at that time were originated in arab countries such as Egypt, Syria, Iraq etc, and I showed that.

The point I made about Ben Gurion is that he was of Polish origin and had changed his name when moving to Israel/ Considering what you were claiming it was a wholly valid point that remains valid. Here's what he said of Arab rejectionism of Zionism

Once again, the history of the Jews, unlike the Palestinians arabs, goes way back 48’, thousands of years before Ben Gurion. King David made Jerusalem its capital thousands years ago.

" If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”

David Ben-Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121.

Ben-Gurion’s Notorious Quotes: Their Polemical Uses & Abuses

I’ve been engaged in a long-term e-mail debate with anti-Zionists, associated with David McReynolds, a former leader of the War Resisters’ League and a tiny remnant that still calls itself the Socialist Party, USA. Seth Farber, one of the most vociferous (although not quite the nastiest) of my...

www.progressiveisrael.org

This time you do mentioning it was Goldmann (personal rival of Ben-Gurion) Quote, which means it’s hearsay … I guess you learned from the last time I exposed your propaganda. As usual, cherry picking quotes to promote your propaganda, nothing new here.

 

[NO1]

Bombings will kill Israelis .

Sure... Keep dreaming

 

[weaver2]

Sure... Keep dreaming

Unless you are talking of bombing only Gaza, any bombs that fall in Israel fall on Israeli land.
Look at the map: there isn't anything left of Palestinian land. If bombs fall they fall on Jewish homes not Palestinian homes.

 

[oneworld2]

My claim was: many Palestinians arabs at that time were originated in arab countries such as Egypt, Syria, Iraq etc, and I showed that.

No, you tried to use the usual comings and goings of people as a tool to disappear the Palestinian people, and you failed

Once again, the history of the Jews, unlike the Palestinians arabs, goes way back 48’, thousands of years before Ben Gurion. King David made Jerusalem its capital thousands years ago.




This time you do mentioning it was Goldmann (personal rival of Ben-Gurion) Quote, which means it’s hearsay … I guess you learned from the last time I exposed your propaganda. As usual, cherry picking quotes to promote your propaganda, nothing new here.

The Celts preceded the Anglo Saxons but it doesn't give the Irish the right to claim England

And, while I am happy to acknowledge that it was Goldman that claimed this was what Ben Gurion had told him, if the quote is okay for none other than the Israeli historian Benny Morris to reference it's okay for me to do so ( see link )

Here's what Morris, along with the reference to Goldmans words, attributes to Ben Gurion during the Arab Revolt 36-39

" We must see the situation for what it is. On the security front, we are those attacked and who are on the defensive. But in the political field we are the attackers and the Arabs are those defending themselves. They are living in the country and own the land, the village. We live in the Diaspora and want only to immigrate [to Palestine] and gain possession of [lirkosh] the land from them."

The above is virtually the same thing Goldman claims he had told him, so the sentiment of a better understanding of the Arab position expressed by Ben Gurion is wholly plausible

https://www.jpost.com/magazine/books/an-excerpt-from-benny-morriss-new-book-1948

 

[Toggle Almendro]

I'm going to save myself some time and let you start answering your own questions.

Very good. The answers to my questions are:

No. No one can provide any examples of Israel failing to govern their own territory when they were in control over it, because no such examples exist.

No. No one can name any interruptions to Israeli rule in the period from 986 BC to 586 BC, because no such interruptions happened.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

The key word in the quote being " innocent" passage. As was pointed out to you earlier, you are not, as a state, compelled to allow the ships of a hostile nation passage through your own territorial waters.

That is incorrect. Innocent refers to the behavior of the ship that is making the passage. Countries are not allowed to label other nations as hostile and thereby prevent their ships from innocent passage.

The Straits are Egyptian territorial waters , whereas the shores of Gaza are NOT Israeli territorial waters and thus their blockade has the shakier legal support/no legal support

Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip is 100% legal.

It is of course an act of war, just as Egypt's blockade of the Straits of Tiran was an act of war. All blockades are acts of war.

But acts of war are perfectly legal, especially when you are at war.

Never try to reason out that which was never reasoned in.

No one has been able to point out any errors in my reasoning.

IMO best just to shoot down specific points in order to undermine the Israeli hasbara and hope the more open minded can see through it as a result of your efforts

No one has been able to shoot down any of my individual points either.

You need to show where in international maritime law it is illegal to prohibit the shipping of a hostile state through you own territorial waters. Can you show this ? Your quote from Johnson had the key words " innocent passage" in it so doesn't support your misuse of what maritime laws states, as already shown.
So, you need to show where a state is compelled to allow the shipping of a hostile state to pass through it's territorial waters and you cannot because the idea is complete nonsense.

Showing that is easy:

Innocent passage - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Nothing in there says anything about arbitrarily labeling someone a hostile state and using that as justification to block their shipping.

 

[NO1]

Unless you are talking of bombing only Gaza, any bombs that fall in Israel fall on Israeli land.
Look at the map: there isn't anything left of Palestinian land. If bombs fall they fall on Jewish homes not Palestinian homes.
View attachment 67371005

Lol. This pic is pure propaganda.

 

[NO1]

No, you tried to use the usual comings and goings of people as a tool to disappear the Palestinian people, and you failed

Wrong.
My point is, when you complaining about many Jews returning to their homeland at that time, there were also many arabs which came to the land of Israel. They came from arab countries such as Egypt, Syria, Iraq etc, as I showed. And you agree with that.

The Celts preceded the Anglo Saxons but it doesn't give the Irish the right to claim England

Should I also remind you San Remo, Balfur and the Mandate?

And, while I am happy to acknowledge that it was Goldman that claimed this was what Ben Gurion had told him, if the quote is okay for none other than the Israeli historian Benny Morris to reference it's okay for me to do so ( see link )

Here's what Morris, along with the reference to Goldmans words, attributes to Ben Gurion during the Arab Revolt 36-39

" We must see the situation for what it is. On the security front, we are those attacked and who are on the defensive. But in the political field we are the attackers and the Arabs are those defending themselves. They are living in the country and own the land, the village. We live in the Diaspora and want only to immigrate [to Palestine] and gain possession of [lirkosh] the land from them."

The above is virtually the same thing Goldman claims he had told him, so the sentiment of a better understanding of the Arab position expressed by Ben Gurion is wholly plausible

https://www.jpost.com/magazine/books/an-excerpt-from-benny-morriss-new-book-1948

As usual, cherry picking quotes to promote your propaganda, nothing new here. I already destroy your poor propaganda time and again.

 

[oneworld2]

That is incorrect. Innocent refers to the behavior of the ship that is making the passage. Countries are not allowed to label other nations as hostile and thereby prevent their ships from innocent passage.

Nope, it's absolutely on the money and it is your own understanding of it that is " incorrect"

The very first point in that which you referenced but, crucially never actually quoted, states the following..........

Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State. Such passage shall take place in conformity with this Convention and with other rules of international law.


The shipping of oil to Eilat obviously " prejudices" the " security of the coastal state" by allowing the Israeli military the means to attack Egypt, which it evidently did in 1967. So on the very first point of that you cited your argument died

Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip is 100% legal.

It is of course an act of war, just as Egypt's blockade of the Straits of Tiran was an act of war. All blockades are acts of war.

But acts of war are perfectly legal, especially when you are at war.

You can blockade a state from your own territorial waters legally but to blockade the territorial waters of Gaza is obviously a different thing altogether and is likely illegal under existing maritime laws

No one has been able to point out any errors in my reasoning.



No one has been able to shoot down any of my individual points either.

That you have refused to see that the above is nonesense doesn't come as a surprise

 

[weaver2]

Lol. This pic is pure propaganda.

OK post one showing original control of land and current control of land in Israel, that you consider to not be propaganda.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

Nope, it's absolutely on the money and it is your own understanding of it that is " incorrect"

That is incorrect. Innocent refers to the behavior of the ship that is making the passage. Countries are not allowed to label other nations as hostile and thereby prevent their ships from innocent passage.

The shipping of oil to Eilat obviously " prejudices" the " security of the coastal state" by allowing the Israeli military the means to attack Egypt, which it evidently did in 1967. So on the very first point of that you cited your argument died

That is incorrect. Shipping oil and other goods counts as innocent passage.

You can blockade a state from your own territorial waters legally but to blockade the territorial waters of Gaza is obviously a different thing altogether and is likely illegal under existing maritime laws

That is incorrect. Both blockades are legal, and both blockades are acts of war.

All blockades are legal. All blockades are acts of war.

That you have refused to see that the above is nonesense doesn't come as a surprise

I never see facts as nonsense.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

OK post one showing original control of land and current control of land in Israel, that you consider to not be propaganda.

The reason why that picture is propaganda is because it deceptively makes it appear that Israel is continually taking land.

It shows slides 1, 2, 3, and 6 of what should be 7 slides.

Slide #4 should show Israel in complete control over Gaza, the West Bank, and the Sinai Peninsula, reflecting their victory after the 1967 War.

Slide #5 should show Israel in complete control of Gaza and the West Bank, illustrating that Israel returned the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt in exchange for peace.

Slide #6 should make it clear that the Palestinian land in that slide was given to the Palestinians when it appeared that they were going to give Israel peace in return for receiving land.

Slide #7 should resemble slide #3, showing the extent of the land that the Palestinians would have received had they made peace with Israel.

 

[weaver2]

The reason why that picture is propaganda is because it deceptively makes it appear that Israel is continually taking land.
It shows slides 1, 2, 3, and 6 of what should be 7 slides.
Slide #4 should show Israel in complete control over Gaza, the West Bank, and the Sinai Peninsula, reflecting their victory after the 1967 War.
Slide #5 should show Israel in complete control of Gaza and the West Bank, illustrating that Israel returned the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt in exchange for peace.
Slide #6 should make it clear that the Palestinian land in that slide was given to the Palestinians when it appeared that they were going to give Israel peace in return for receiving land.
Slide #7 should resemble slide #3, showing the extent of the land that the Palestinians would have received had they made peace with Israel.

The naivety displayed here is breathtaking.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

The naivety displayed here is breathtaking.

There is no naivety in factual accuracy. It merely requires showing all the facts so that people get an accurate impression.

 

[weaver2]

There is no naivety in factual accuracy. It merely requires showing all the facts so that people get an accurate impression.

Then you should show real facts and explain why so much of the rest of the world has condemned Jewish policy.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

Then you should show real facts

I have.

That Israel gave Egypt the Sinai Peninsula in exchange for a permanent peace is a real fact.

That Israel would have returned to 1967 borders had the Palestinians been willing to make peace is also a real fact.

 

[weaver2]

I have.
That Israel gave Egypt the Sinai Peninsula in exchange for a permanent peace is a real fact.

LOL right after they took it from Egypt and the UN told them to give it back.

That Israel would have returned to 1967 borders had the Palestinians been willing to make peace is also a real fact.

And you know this is a fact because .................. ?????

 

[Toggle Almendro]

LOL right after they took it from Egypt and the UN told them to give it back.

Also right after Egypt waged wars of aggression against Israel, and the UN told Egypt to make peace with Israel.

It remains a fact that Israel gave that land to Egypt in exchange for a permanent peace.

And you know this is a fact because .................. ?????

Because I watched Israel offer it to the Palestinians over and over and over again as part of the peace process.

 

[weaver2]

Also right after Egypt waged wars of aggression against Israel and the UN told Egypt to make peace with Israel.
It remains a fact that Israel gave that land to Egypt in exchange for a permanent peace.

The UN told both of them to cut it out and behave. Egypt has a bigger military than the Palestinians. Israel decided that it was probably better to just keep attacking the weaker of the two.

Because I watched Israel offer it to the Palestinians over and over and over again as part of the peace process.

We saw it differently.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

The UN told both of them to cut it out and behave.

It remains a fact that Israel handed land over to Egypt in exchange for a permanent peace.

Egypt has a bigger military than the Palestinians. Israel decided that it was probably better to just keep attacking the weaker of the two.

Wrong. Israel offered land to the Palestinians in exchange for a permanent peace.

We saw it differently.

Israel's peace offers were quite clear.

 

[weaver2]

It remains a fact that Israel handed land over to Egypt in exchange for a permanent peace.
Wrong. Israel offered land to the Palestinians in exchange for a permanent peace.
Israel's peace offers were quite clear.

So Revelation is accomplished and you are awaiting the Rapture. Good luck, wear something loose fitting and don't act too disappointed when it turns out that real facts really exist.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

don't act too disappointed when it turns out that real facts really exist.

What are you talking about? I'm the one who has been pointing out that real facts really exist.