Ireland: Israeli products marked with yellow sticker

I agree, there are indeed some anti-Semites here hiding behind carefully nuanced pseudo-intellectuallism in an attempt to disguise their bigotry. I am not one, and have been at pains to not only point this out, but to condemn them whenever possible. I also make it clear that I'm equally condemnatory of Palestinian atrocities when they occur. Sadly there are those pro-Israelis who cannot brook any criticism of their government without resorting to accusations of Jew-hatred. Anyone who cannot find any wrongdoing within their nation, or won't admit to any despite cast-iron evidence to the contrary, is fundamentally dishonest and not worth debating with, frankly.

 

You've got that right - its a total " FABRICATION" of history by Efram Karsh.

===

Read Benny Morris :

( edited -sorry link not working )



and Ilan Pappe "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine "

"In his preface, Ilan Pappé says, 'such a painful journey into the past is the only way forward if we want to create a better future for us all.

' Pappé states that the ethnic cleansing idea was first expressed in early Zionist writings For example, in 1917, Leo Motzkin stated 'the colonization of Palestine has to go in two directions, Jewish settlement…and the resettlement of the Arabs.'

In 1938 Ben-Gurion stated, 'I am for compulsory transfer; I do not see anything immoral in it.]

Then in 1948, according to Ilan Pappé, the ethnic cleansing was implemented by Ben-Gurion, Yigael Yadin, Moshe Dayan, Yigal Allon, Yitzhak Sadeh, Moshe Kalman, Moshe Camel, Yitzak Rabin, Shimon Avidan, Rehavam Zeevi, Yitzhak Pundak, and others The ideological drivers of the campaign were Ben-Gurion's close advisers whom Ilan Pappé calls the 'Consultancy group'. The implementers were officers who led attacks executed by the Haganah (an Israeli militia) and the Irgun (another Israeli militia), the Stern Gang (another Israeli militia), and the Israeli Defense Force.

The details of the "ethnic cleansing strategy" are fully described in an Israeli military/government document entitled Plan Dalet. Plan Dalet, according to Pappé, spells out, in writing, the clear directives of the operation.

It included 'bombarding villages…setting fire to homes, properties and goods, expulsion, demolition and planting mines among the rubble to prevent any of the expelled inhabitants from returning.'[8] Pappe catalogues actions such as poisoning of the water supply of Acre with typhoid, numerous cases of rape, atrocities, and dozens of massacres.

=======


David Grun - true to his kind would say one thing - one day (to Western listeners ) and the direct opposite to his fellow ZioNasties . - He always spoke with two- forked tongues.- history's most accomplished of liars .

...

 

I have he doesn't believe nor does he state that there was an ethnic cleansing of the Arabs and while he admits that some Israeli soldiers forcibly removed Arabs from their villages it was not in the main nor was it official policy of the Israeli leadership:

"There was no Zionist 'plan' or blanket policy of evicting the Arab population, or of 'ethnic cleansing'"


Morris writes that Weitz recorded Ben-Gurion's agreement, though according to Morris, Ben-Gurion wanted to focus first on the destruction of Arab villages, and only later on helping the residents to resettle in other Arab countries. Ben-Gurion's account of the meeting was different: he said he had agreed to the establishment of a committee to oversee the "cleaning up" (nikui) of Arab towns and villages and their settlement by Jews, but said he had nowhere explicitly referred to the destruction of villages or preventing refugees from returning.[4] Efraim Karsh writes that Ben-Gurion specifically told Weitz that he rejected the idea of the Transfer Committee. Karsh quotes Weitz as saying: "[Ben-Gurion] would like to convene a narrow meeting and to appoint a committee to handle the issue [the cleaning up or improvement of Arab villages]. He does not agree to the [existence] of our temporary committee."[5]

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

Benny Morris found that out of 228 empty Palestinian villages, that in 41 villages the inhabitants were expelled by the IDF; in 90 they left because of attacks on other villages, in six they left upon orders from Palestinian authorities and in the remaining 46 it is unknown why the villages were abandoned.

The UN defines ethnic cleansing as: "rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove from a given area persons of another ethnic or religious group."
Interesting then that Israel proper alone has a nearly 30% Arab population.

Furthermore; it was the Arabs who initiated the conflict in the first place:

Beginning with the Battle of Tel Hai when Arabs attacked a Jewish settlement in which 8 Jews were killed, this was followed by the Nebi Musa Riots in 1921 in which the Arabs killed 5 Jews, then the Jaffa Riots, also in 1921 where the Arabs killed 45 Jews, and then we had the Palestine Riots in 1929 in which the Arabs killed 133 Jews, this was followed by the Safed Massacre in 1929 in which 20 Jews were killed, this all culminated with the anti-Semitic Jihadist organization known as the Black Hand which routinely targeted Jewish settlers culminating in the Arab revolt between 1936 and 1939 in which the Arabs indiscriminately targeted Jews.

The Deir Yassin massacre on April 9, 1948 which resulted in 107 dead villagers was followed by the Hassah Medical Convoy Massacre on April 13th 1948 resulting in 79 dead Jews, and itself was followed by the Kfar Etzion Massacre on May 13, 1948 resulting in the deaths of 129 Jews, Kfar Etzion was in turn followed by the al-Dawayima massacre where appx.100 Arabs were killed on October 28, 1948, and point of fact Deir Yassin itself was preceded by the Ben Yehuda Street Bombing of February 22, 1948 in which 58 Jewish civilians were killed.

The Levantine Jews (as proven by numerous genetic studies) through the Jewish Agency which became the provisional Israeli government fully accepted the partition plan; whereas, the Arab Higher Commission for Palestine and the Arab League fully rejected partition and begun a war against the Jews even before the British Mandate expired through the Army of the Holy war led by the nephew of the Nazi Mufti and the Arab Liberation Army respectively.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_of_the_Holy_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Liberation_Army

This was coupled with a detailed plan formed and legislated by the Arab League to ethnically cleanse and lock their own Jewish citizens into concentration camps while seizing all of their assets:


JEWS DISPLACED FROM ARAB COUNTRIES: A STORY OF COLLUSION

http://www.justiceforjews.com/chrono_web.pdf


Text of the Law Drafted by the Political Committee of the Arab League
Summary

In 1947, the Political Committee of the Arab League (League of Arab States) drafted a law which was to govern the legal status of Jewish residents in all Arab League countries. This law had already been approved by Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iraq, provided that, “beginning with a specified date, all Jews – with the exception of citizens of non-Arab countries – were to be considered members of the Jewish ‘minority state of Palestine,’ and that their bank account be frozen and used to finance resistance to ‘Zionist ambitions in Palestine.’ Jews believed to be active Zionists would be interned as political prisoners and their assets confiscated. Only Jews who accept active service in Arab armies or place themselves at the disposal of these armies would be considered ‘Arabs.’” 1

Excerpts of Direct Quotes of the Law drafted by the Political Committee of the Arab League

• “All Jewish citizens…will be considered as members of the Jewish minority of the State of Palestine and will have to register [“within 7 days”] with the authorities of the region wherein they reside, giving their names, the exact number of members in their families, their addresses, the names of their banks and the amounts of their deposits in these banks…”2

• “Bank accounts of Jews will be frozen. These funds will be utilized in part or in full to finance the movement of resistance to Zionist ambitions in Palestine.”3

• “Only Jews who are subjects of foreign countries will be considered ‘neutrals.’ These will be compelled either to return to their countries, with a minimum of delay, or be considered Arabs and obliged to accept active service in the Arab army.”4

• “Every Jew whose activities reveal that he is an active Zionist will be considered as a political prisoner and will be interned in places specifically designated for that purpose by police authorities or by the Government. His financial resources, instead of being frozen, will be confiscated.”5

• “Any Jew who will be able to prove that his activities are anti-Zionist will be free to act as he likes, provided that he declares his readiness to join the Arab armies.”6

• “The foregoing…does not mean that those Jews will not be submitted to paragraphs 1 and 2 of this law.”7

1 Memorandum Submitted to the U.N. Economic and Social Council by the World Jewish Congress. (Jan. 19, 1948 ) Section I. (2) a. June 2, 1948. [ZIIC - This reference is in the document prepared by JJAC and is probably incorrect]

2 Text of the Law drafted by the Political Committee of the Arab League. Paragraph 1.

3 ibid. Paragraph 2.

4 ibid. Paragraph 3.

5 ibid. Paragraph 5.

6 ibid. Paragraph 6.

7 ibid. Paragraph 7. (Paragraph 1 & 2 indicate all Jews must register and disclose personal and banking information and

that bank accounts will be frozen and utilized for anti-Zionist resistance.)

http://www.zionism-israel.com/hdoc/Arab_League_Law_Jews.htm

Pappe is a proven fraud, liar and propagandist he intentionally took the single quote from Gurion which supposedly supported transfer out of context to fit his narrative by leaving out the entire end of the quote in order for it to mean the exact opposite of what Gurion actually said:

"Complete transfer without compulsion – and ruthless compulsion, at that – is hardly imaginable." Some – Circassians, Druze, Bedouin, Shi’ites, tenant farmers, and landless laborers – could be persuaded to leave. But "the majority of the Arabs could hardly be expected to leave voluntarily within the short period of time which can materially affect our problem." He concluded that the Jews should not “discourage other people, British or American, who favour transfer from advocating this course, but we should in no way make it part of our programme." (Righteous Victims, p 169) -- Ben Gurion

Thanks for playing but way to fail again!

 

Link to Morris book posted earlier (google books - not working :
so its back to C + P

"It was Morris’s book, "The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem", that first prompted public concern Leaving aside differences of subject, methodology and viewpoint, what unites these historians is that they are bent on unpicking Israel’s national myths . They have focused particularly on the myths of the first Arab-Israeli war, contributing (albeit partially, as we shall see), to establishing the truth about the Palestinian exodus. And in the process they have incurred the wrath of Israel’s orthodox historians .

This research activity was originally stimulated by two separate sets of events. First, the opening of Israeli archives, both state and private, covering the period in question. Here it is worth noting that the historians appear to have ignored almost entirely both the archives of the Arab countries (not that these are notable for their accessibility) and oral history potential among Palestinians themselves, where considerable work has been done by other historians. As the Palestinian historian, Nur Masalha, rightly says: "History and historiography ought not necessarily be written, exclusively or mainly, by the victors.

Second, this delving into Israel’s archives would perhaps not have borne such fruit if the following ten years had not been marked by the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 and by the outbreak of the intifada in 1987.

Both these events accentuated the split between the nationalist camp and the peace movement in Israel itself. As it turned out, the "new historians" were uncovering the origins of the Palestinian problem at precisely the moment that the whole question of Palestine was returning to centre stage.

In a recent article in the "Revue d’études palestiniennes" (, Ilan Pappe, one of the pioneers of this "new historiography", has stressed the importance of the dialogue that was unfolding in that period between Israelis and Palestinians. It developed, he says, "basically among academics. Surprising as it may seem, it was thanks to this dialogue that most Israeli researchers who were working on their country’s history and who had no links to the radical political organisations, became aware of the version of history held by their Palestinian counterparts. They became aware of the fundamental contradiction between Zionist national ambitions and their enactment at the expense of the local population in Palestine."

To this we might add that the manipulation of history for political ends is not an exclusively Israeli domain: most often it goes hand in hand with nationalism.


What lessons have the revisionist historians drawn from their diligent working-through of the archives? As regards the broad picture of the balance of power between Jews and Arabs in both 1947 and 1948, their results contradict the generally-held picture of a weak and poorly armed Jewish community in Palestine threatened with extermination by a highly armed and united Arab world - David versus Goliath. Quite the contrary. The revisionists concur in pointing to the many advantages enjoyed by the nascent Jewish state over its enemies: the decomposition of Palestinian society; the divisions in the Arab world and the inferiority of their armed forces (in terms of numbers, training and weaponry, and hence impact); the strategic advantage enjoyed by Israel as a result of its agreement with King Abdullah of Transjordan (in exchange for the West Bank, he undertook not to attack the territory allocated to Israel by the UN); British support for this compromise, together with the joint support of the United States and the Soviet Union; the sympathy of world public opinion and so forth.

This all helps to explain the devastating effectiveness of the Jewish offensives of spring 1948. It also sheds new light on the context in which the mass departure of Palestinians took place.

The exodus was divided into two broadly equal waves: one before and one after the decisive turning-point of the declaration of the State of Israel on 14 May 1948 and the intervention of the armies of the neighbouring Arab states on the following day. One can agree that the flight of thousands of well-to-do Palestinians during the first few weeks following the adoption of the UN partition plan - particularly from Haifa and Jaffa - was essentially voluntary. The question is what was the truth of the departures that happened subsequently?

In the opening pages of "The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem", Benny Morris offers the outlines of an overall answer: using a map that shows the 369 Arab towns and villages in Israel (within its 1949 borders), he lists, area by area, the reasons for the departure of the local population (9). In 45 cases he admits that he does not know. The inhabitants of the other 228 localities left under attack by Jewish troops, and in 41 cases they were expelled by military force. In 90 other localities, the Palestinians were in a state of panic following the fall of a neighbouring town or village, or for fear of an enemy attack, or because of rumours circulated by the Jewish army - particularly after the 9 April 1948 massacre of 250 inhabitants of Deir Yassin, where the news of the killings swept the country like wildfire.

By contrast, he found only six cases of departures at the instigation of local Arab authorities. "There is no evidence to show that the Arab states and the AHC wanted a mass exodus or issued blanket orders or appeals to the Palestinians to flee their homes (though in certain areas the inhabitants of specific villages were ordered by Arab commanders or the AHC to leave, mainly for strategic reasons)." ("The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem", p. 129). On the contrary, anyone who fled was actually threatened with "severe punishment". As for the broadcasts by Arab radio stations allegedly calling on people to flee, a detailed listening to recordings of their programmes of that period shows that the claims were invented for pure propaganda.


Military operations marked by atrocities

In "1948 and After" Benny Morris examines the first phase of the exodus and produces a detailed analysis of a source that he considers basically reliable: a report
-----
Morris makes clear that the prime minister was the originator of the Dalet Plan. In July 1948 we find Ben Gurion again, giving the order for the operations in Lydda and Ramleh: "Expel them!" he told Yigal Allon and Yitzhak Rabin - a section censored out of Rabin’s memoirs, but published thirty years later in the "New York Times" .
---

In short, as Morris himself points out, power at that period of Israel’s history resided with Ben Gurion and with him alone. All issues, whether military or civilian, were decided with him, often without the slightest consultation with the government, let alone with the parties that comprised it. In such a situation, the absence from the archives of any formal parliamentary or governmental decision to expel the Palestinians proves nothing. As Morris himself admits, "Ben Gurion always refrained from issuing clear or written expulsion orders; he preferred that his generals ’understand’ what he wanted done. He wished to avoid going down in history as the ’great expeller’" ("The Birth...", pp. 292-3).
====

David Grun can truly be described as Hypocrite - supreme / par excellence

(wink).

 

I just quoted Morris and he calls you a liar.

"There was no Zionist 'plan' or blanket policy of evicting the Arab population, or of 'ethnic cleansing'"

And Morris does not agree that Plan Dalet was ethnic cleansing, here is Plan Dalet in its totality:

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

Since you are so fond of C/P why don't you go ahead and show us the portion which calls for ethnic cleansing, hint it isn't in there.

Rabin has offered two accounts of what happened next. In a 1977 interview with Michael Bar-Zohar, Rabin said Allon asked what was to be done with the residents; in response, Ben-Gurion had waved his hand and said, "garesh otam"—"expel them."[46] In the manuscript of his memoirs in 1979, Rabin wrote that Ben-Gurion had not spoken, but had only waved his hand, and that Rabin had understand this to mean "drive them out."[45] The expulsion order for Lydda was issued at 13:30 hours on 12 July, signed by Rabin.[47]

In an interview with The New York Times two days later, Yigal Allon took issue with Rabin's version of events. "With all my high esteem for Rabin during the war of independence, I was his commander and my knowledge of the facts is therefore more accurate," he told Shipler. "I did not ask the late Ben-Gurion for permission to expel the population of Lydda. I did not receive such permission and did not give such orders." He said the residents left in part because they were told to by the Arab Legion, so the latter could recapture Lydda at a later date, and in part because they were panic-stricken.[48] Yoav Gelber also takes issue with Rabin's account. He writes that Ben-Gurion was in the habit of expressing his orders clearly, whether verbally or in writing, and would not have issued an order by waving his hand; he adds that there is no record of any meetings before the invasion that indicate expulsion was discussed. He attributes the expulsions to Allon, who he says was known for his scorched earth policy. Wherever Allon was in charge of Israeli troops, Gelber writes, no Palestinians remained.[49]

Sh!trit/Shertok intervention

The Israeli cabinet reportedly knew nothing about the expulsion plan until Bechor Sh!trit, Minister for Minority Affairs, appeared unannounced in Ramle on 12 July. He was shocked when he realized troops were organizing expulsions. He returned to Tel Aviv for a meeting with Foreign Minister Moshe Shertok, who met with Ben Gurion to agree on guidelines for the treatment of the residents, though Morris writes that Ben Gurion apparently failed to tell Sh!trit or Shertok that he himself was the source of the expulsion orders. Gelber disagrees with Morris's analysis, arguing that Ben-Gurion's agreement with Sh!trit and Shertok is evidence that expulsion was not his intention, rather than evidence of his duplicity, as Morris implies.[49] The men agreed the townspeople should be told that anyone who wanted to leave could do so, but that anyone who stayed was responsible for himself and would not be given food. Women, children, the old, and the sick were not to be forced to leave, and the monasteries and churches must not be damaged, though no mention was made of the mosques. Ben-Gurion passed the order to the IDF General Staff, who passed it to Dani HQ at 23:30 hours on 12 July, ten hours after the expulsion orders were issued; Morris writes that there was an ambiguity in the instruction that women, children and the sick were not to be forced to go: the word "lalechet" can mean either "go" or "walk". Satisfied that the order had been passed on, Shertok believed he had managed to avert the expulsions, not realizing that, even as he was discussing them in Tel Aviv, they had already begun.[50]




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exodus_from_Lydda_and_Ramla#(*)(*)(*)(*)rit.2FShertok_intervention

 

If not for European Zionism - influx of Europe's Jews - + ethnic cleansing of Palestine - I'd bet the indigenous Mizrahim/Sephardim (Arab Jews) would still be living /prospering - amongst their non-Jewish, Arab neighbours as they've done for over a thousand years ..
-----

Following is from Baruch Kimmerling )and professor of sociology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem + S Migdal )

Tochnit Daleth

"Plan D and the Israelification of the Land At the beginning of the 1970s.

I had begun to work on research at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, which, I hoped, would produce a Ph.D. thesis in sociology. The subject was the Zionist ideology of land and its relationship to other political doctrines. In the earlier stages of my research, I was shocked to discover that a major “purification” of the land (the term “ethnic cleansing” was unknown in that period) from its Arab Palestinian inhabitant was done during the 1948 War by the Jewish military and para-military forces. During this research I found, solely based on Israeli sources, that about 350 Arab villages were “abandoned” and their 3.25 million dunums of rural land, were confiscated and became. in several stages, the property of the Israeli state or the Jewish National Fund. I also found that Moshe Dayan, then Minister of Agriculture, disclosed that about 700,000 Arabs who “left” the territories had owned four million dunums of land.Another finding was that from 1882 until 1948, all the Jewish companies (including the Jewish National Fund, an organ of World Zionist Organization) and private individuals in Palestine had succeeded in buying only about 7 percent of the total lands in British Palestine. All the rest was taken by sword and nationalized during the 1948 war and after. Today, only about 7 percent of Israel land is privately owned, about half of it by Arabs. Israel is the only “democracy” in the world that nationalized almost all if its land and prohibited even the leasing of most of agricultural lands to non-Jews, a situation made possible by a complex framework of legal arrangements with the Jewish National Fund, including the Basic Law: Israel Lands (1960), the Israel Lands Law and Israel Lands Administration Law (1960), as well as the Covenants between the Government of the State of Israel and the WZO of 1954 and the JNF of 1961

.Now the remaining puzzle was if this depopulation was a “natural” consequence of the war, which led the Arab populations to flee the country, as Israel officially states all the time while simultaneously accusing the Arab leadership of encouraging this flight, or

if it was an intentional Jewish policy to acquire the maximum amount of territory with minimum amount of Arab population. Further research showed that the military blueprint for the 1948 war was the so-called “Plan D” (Tochnit Daleth). General Yigael Yadin, Head of the Operations Branch of the Israeli unified armed forces, launched it on March 10, 1948. The plan expected military clashes between the state- making Jewish community of colonial Palestine with the Arab community and the assumed intervention by military forces of the Arab states. In the plan’s preamble, Yadin stated:The aim of this plan is the control of the area of the Jewish State and the defense of its borders [as determined by the UN Partition Plan] and the clusters of [Jewish] settlements outside the boundaries, against regular and irregular enemy forces operating from bases outside and inside the Jewish State.

Furthermore, the plan suggested the following actions, amongst others, in order to reach these goals:Actions against enemy settlements located in our, or near our, defense systems [i.e., Jewish settlement and localities] with the aim of preventing their use as bases for active armed forces. These actions should be divided into the following types: The destruction of villages (by fire, blowing up and mining) – especially of those villages over which we cannot gain [permanent] control. Gaining of control will be accomplished in accordance with the following instructions: The encircling of the village and the search of it. In the event of resistance - the destruction of the resisting forces and the expulsion of the population beyond the boundaries of the State. The conclusion was that, as in many other cases, what seemed at first glance a pure and limited military doctrine, proved itself in the case of “Plan D” to comprise far-reaching measures that lead to a complete demographic, ethnic, social and political transformation of Palestine. Implementing the spirit of this doctrine, the Jewish military forces conquered about 20,000 square kilometers of territory (compared with the 14,000 square kilometers granted them by the UN Partition Resolution) and purified them almost completely from their Arab inhabitants. About 800,000 Arab inhabitants lived on the territories before they fell under Jewish control following the 1948 war. Fewer than 100,000 Arabs remained there under Jewish control after the cease fire. An additional 50,000 were included within the Israeli state’s territory following the Israeli-Jordan’s armistice agreements that transferred several villages to Israeli rule. The military doctrine, the base of Plan D, clearly reflected the local Zionist ideological aspirations to acquire a maximal Jewish territorial continuum, cleansed from Arab presence, as a necessary condition for establishing an exclusive Jewish nation-state.

The British colonial regime – between 1921 to 1948 – provided a political and military umbrella under which the Zionist enterprise was able to develop its basic institutional, economic and social framework, but also secured the essential interests of the Arab collectivity.

As the British umbrella was removed, the Arab and the Jewish communities found themselves face-to-face in a zero-sum-like situation. By rejecting the partition plan the Arab community and leadership were confident not only in their absolute right to control the whole country that then had an Arab majority comprising two-thirds of the population, but also in their ability to do so.

The Jewish community and leadership appreciated, on the one hand, that they did not have enough power and population to control the entire territory of Palestine and to expel or to rule its Arab majority. Thus, on the other hand, they officially accepted the partition plan, but invested all their efforts towards improving its terms and maximally expanding their boundaries while reducing the number of Arabs in them. It was impossible, at that stage, to find hard evidence that, despite its far-reaching political consequences and meaning, “Plan D” was ever adopted by the “political level,” or even discussed by it. My intuition said that many political and national leaders knew very well that there were some kind of orders and plans that were better not to discuss or present officially. Later Morris’s findings supported the correctness this intuition. In any case, though, the way that the military operations of 1948 were conducted does not leave any room for doubts that Plan D was indeed the doctrine used by the Jewish military forces during this war, or about the “spirit” and perceptions behind it.In the Winter of 1974, I submitted my Ph. D. thesis and it was approved by the relevant committee of experts in the Spring of 1975. For many years, I tried to publish it, without success. My senior colleagues at the Hebrew University explained to me with a strain of pity, “well everybody who lived in this country in that period knows precisely what happened, but it is not publishable yet. Perhaps it will be after a hundred years or so….” Some others kindly advised me to find more interesting topics for research. However, I insisted and finally I found the Institute of International Studies of the University of California at Berkeley ready to publish it. The book was published in 1983 under the title Zionism and Territory: The Socio-Territorial Dimensions of Zionist Politics. Being a “dry” professional text, it did now draw public attention and achieved limited circulation but became well known and widely quoted by a small circle of experts. -

.......

 

Oh (*)(*)(*)(*) of here with BS I have already provided the entirety of Plan D in full now Copy/Paste the portion that calls for ethnic cleansing:

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

Way to fail Marlowe, there is no call for ethnic cleansing within the Plan, your sources assertions are pure fantasy.

Abject (*)(*)(*)(*)ing nonsense the overwhelming majority of land in the mandate was British Crown Land, it was already public land, it was not taken from anyone because the Arab landless migrant farmers never (*)(*)(*)(*)ing owned it. Furthermore; the Israeli Land Administration does not deny leases to Arabs, the JNF is a private institution and may lease land to whomever they see fit but the ILA is responsible for 93% of all Israeli land and again grants leases to Arabs.

 

Jewish virtual is a Zionist source - What else can one expect from them .

its not a reliable source .




10th March
On that day in 1948, two months before Israel’s unilateral declaration of independence in defiance of the will of the organized international community as it then was at the UN, Zionism’s in-Palestine political and military leaders met in Tel Aviv to formally adopt PLAN DALET, the blueprint with operational military orders for the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. Deir Yassin

They did not and never would refer to the crime they authorised as ethnic cleansing. Their euphemism for it was “transfer”.[

Watch - Listen and learn .


[video=youtube;VD1terYXUwQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VD1terYXUwQ[/video]


Face Y - Thanks to you , I've learnt - mainly from other Jews - i.e. anti-Zionist Jewish professors /researchers what a load of lies the Zionists have been spreading and how Gentiles like me have swallowed it in the past. But now no longer , most interested people in the West , are beginning to learn facts which have been hidden over the last 60 plus years
======

...
.....

 

Funny how liars invariably accuse others of lying - when their own lies are challenged /exposed .

Besides why would a nice Jewish boy -like Pappe - sacrifice his position in Israel + other Jews - with what your thought controllers call "lies" . ?
=====
The earliest information we have on Zionism’s thinking is from the diary of Theodor Herzl, the founding father of Zionism’s colonial-like enterprise. He wrote:

“We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country… expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.”


Those words were committed to paper by Herzl in 1895 but they were not published (in other words they were suppressed) until 1962.

By August 1937 “transfer” was a discreet but hot topic for discussion at the 20th Zionist Congress in Zurich, Switzerland. All in attendance were aware that the process of dispossessing the Palestinian peasants (the fellahin) mainly by purchasing land from absentee owners had been underway for years. Referring to this David Ben-Gurion, who would become Israel’s first prime minister, said:


“You are no doubt aware of the (Jewish National Fund’s) activity in this respect. Now a transfer of a completely different scope will have to be carried out. In many parts of the country new settlement will not be possible without transferring the Arab fellahin…Jewish power (in Palestine), which grows steadily, will also increase our possibilities to carry out this transfer on a large scale.”[/B]

A year later Ben-Gurion told a meeting of the Jewish Agency that he supported compulsory transfer. He added:

“I don’t see anything immoral in it.”

In my view that’s a most revealing statement. It tells us – does it not? – that Ben-Gurion, the Zionist state’s founding father, was a man with no sense of what was morally right and wrong.


=====

Face Y - the more I read abt Zionism from other sources - the less I can accept in what you have to say.

tata....

...

 

Gertcha - Gai Avek - How the fek can Morris call me a liar when he doesn't know me. ?
?
There 're endless disputes between Jewish historians/professors - + them calling each other LIARS . -

Go learn ...+ try opening your mind - examine some new information other than what you've been programmed to believe.

......

 

It is the verbatim text of Plan Dalet it is a primary source it is irrelevant what website it is on but fine how about American Muslims for Palestine:

http://www.ampalestine.org/index.php/history/original-documents/246-plan-dalet

Provided the section of Plan Dalet that calls for ethnic cleansing in any way, shape, or form.

Pure propaganda I have read Plan Dalet and you and Pappe are spouting lies.

No because Finkelstein is as FOS as Pappe you have been provided Plan Dalet in its entirety your assertions are now proven lies as the entire forum now sees not a single thing you state should be trusted.

 

A) What position did Herzl ever hold in the Israeli government?

B) He did not say the Arabs he said the poor, he was talking about economic prosperity not ethnic cleansing albeit completely misguided, and he couldn't have been referring to the Arabs because at this period he did not consider the Mandate to be the site of a future Jewish state.

C) Here is the entry in full context:



When we occupy the land, we shall bring immediate benefits to the state that receives us. We must expropriate gently the private property on the estates assigned to us. We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our country. The property owners will come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discretely and circumspectly. Let the owners of immovable property believe that they are cheating us, selling us things for more than they are worth. But we are not going to sell them anything back.

It goes without saying that we shall respectfully tolerate persons of other faiths and protect their property, their honor, and their freedom with the harshest means of coercion. This is another area in which we shall set the entire old world a wonderful example. ...

Estate owners who are attached to their soil ... will be offered a complete transplantation–to any place they wish, like our own people. ...If this offer is not accepted either, no harm will be done. ... we shall simply leave them there ....

Your article is ripping quotes from Benny Morris out of context he was actually arguing against the minority who rejected partition and demanded all of the mandate west of the Jordan river, Ben-Gurion was simply voicing his support for the Peel Commission recommendations which called for a population swap from Jews into a Jewish state and Arabs into a Palestinian state he was not supporting ethnic cleansing but rather population transfer along the lines of what happened in the population transfer during the partition of India IE population swaps, Jews being moved from the lands allocated to the Arabs into the lands allocated to the Jews and vice versa.

Here is that quote in context from Righteous Victims:

http://books.google.com/books?id=jG... immoral in it."&pg=PA143#v=onepage&q&f=false

Your assertion that supporting the Peel Commissions recommendations was supporting ethnic cleansing is absolute nonsense.

 

Haha..I'm not at all a racist...the Zionists supposedly are, AND you are for sure one for labeling me a little Nazi kid. Nazis were and are Germans = very decent people who support Israel 150%! BUT I am a Canadian, and Canada is best friend with Israel.
See, what nonsense you talk??

 

Then why did you ask if he was a Jew when I said that Juan Cole lies 99.9% of the time?

We also have telling little anti-Semitic quotes like this:


My private life is none of your business.

You are right... the crafty Jew does control the world. It is all documented and easily researched. The www is full of it, like ...

JEWS Controlling The World Economy & Much, Much More

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=293404&page=13&p=1062399963#post1062399963

 

Yeah - sure - from your link it confirms that "The text that follows is translated from Sefer Toldot Hahaganah [History of the Haganah], vol. 3, ed, by Yehuda Slutsky (TelAviv: Zionist Library, 1972),

You've succeeded in making a right - wotsits - of yourself .



As I'm previously shown that Jews were much too crafty to have clearly stated their plan - and used word like "transfer " instead of ethnic cleansing - which was a term not in general use mid'20th Century.

This is from the the very same link which you so obligingly posted - and repeating what I've said previously . :


Face Y - you should've thoroughly checked the link before posting it .
"

"PLAN DALET AND THE TRANSFER OF PALESTINIANS


The Zionist plans for transferring Palestinians out of their homeland was made clear in the Plan Dalet, the master defense plan of the army, the Haganah, dated March 10, 1948. The manifesto outlined how the Jewish conquest of Palestine should be carried out. A major portion of the plan outlined how Jewish fighters were to secure and take control of villages and areas outside the boundaries the United Nations had set for the state of Israel.

“Zionism’s responsibility for the Palestinian exodus and diaspora is an integral part of the genesis of the State of Israel,” Khalidi wrote in a 1961 article titled, “Plan Dalet: Master Plan for the Conquest of Palestine.”


According to Khalidi’s article, the idea of transferring Arabs out of Palestine predated the Nakba by decades. Herzl, for instance, in the late 1800s, promoted the idea of the “lesser evil.” That is, “any hardship inflicted on the indigenous population of the land chosen by them was outweighed by the solution that the Zionist possession of the land offered to the Jewish problem,” Khalidi wrote. “The yardstick of the lesser evil became the moral alibi of the Zionist movement, dwarfing and finally submerging the anguish of its victims. Thus Herzl could say with little qualms of conscience of the indigenous population of the land to be possessed: ‘We intend to work the poor population across the frontier surreptitiously by providing work for them in transit countries but denying them any employment in our own land.’”

More quotes:


“Under present circumstances Zionism cannot be realized without a transition period during which the Jewish minority would exercise revolutionary rule … during which the state apparatus, the administration, and the military establishment would be in the hands of the minority.” ~ Chaim Arlosoroff, director of the Political Department of the Jewish Agency, 1932.


"It is the duty of Israel to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is n o Zionism, colonization, or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands." ~ former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, quoted in the Agence France Presse, 11/15/1998.

“If it is clear that a substantial amount of land would be made available for the Jewish area, the most strenuous efforts should be made to obtain an agreement for the exchange of land and population. … It should be part of the agreement that in the last resort the exchange (transfer of Palestinians) would be compulsory.” ~ Royal Peel Commission report, 1937.
(Source: Khalidi, “Plan Dalet&#8221

Khalidi writes that the idea of transfer resurfaced near the end of the World War II, both in Britain and the United States. In 1944, the British Labor Party Executive said the Arabs should be encouraged to move out as the Jews move in. And ex-President Herbert Hoover advocated transferring Palestinians to Iraq in order to accommodate immigrant Jews, an idea the American Zionist Emergency Council applauded.

These statements and reports as well as studies conducted by academic scholars – including Israeli academics - refute the propagandized theory that Arab leaders told Palestinians to leave their homeland as the Zionists have asserted for more than 60 years. Neither Khalidi nor British writer Erskine Childers, who examined the back files of the Near East monitoring stations for both the British and American governments, found any evidence that Arab leaders encouraged mass evacuation of Palestine. To the contrary, Arab leaders told the Palestinians to stay put.

“Not only was there no hint of any Arab evacuation order, but the Arab radio stations had urged the Palestinians to hold on and be steadfast whereas it was the Jewish radio stations of the Haganah and the Irgun and the Stern Gang, which had been engaged in incessant and strident psychological warfare against the Arab civilian population,” Khalidi writes.

Israeli historian Benny Morris wrote in his book "The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited" (Cambridge Middle East Studies, 2004) that he found no evidence suggesting Arab leaders encouraged evacuation.

"I have found no contemporary evidence to show that either they (Arab leaders) or the Mufti ordered or directly encouraged the mass exodus of April-May (194. As to the Palestinian leaders, it may be worth noting that for decades their policy had been to hold fast to the soil and to resist eviction and displacement of communities."

Sometimes the orders to evacuate came from top Jewish officials. On July 13, 1948, the Haganah turned its attention to the Palestinian villages of Lydda and Ramleh, "forcefully compelling the entire population of as many as 70,000 men, women and children to flee their homes," Neff wrote in "Fifty Years of Israel."

"That same day, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion ordered all the Palestinians expelled. The order said: 'The residents of Lydda must be expelled quickly without attention to age.' It was signed by Lt. Col. Yitzhak Rabin, operations chief of the Lydda-Ramley attack and later Israel's military chief of staff and its prime minister in 1974-77, and from 1992 until his assassination in 1995. A similar order was issued for Ramleh," Neff wrote.


Plan Dalet showed intention and planning to rid Palestine of its indigenous population, Bazian said. “It was a deliberate act to empty the land of its original inhabitants.”

It’s important to recognize that policies for ethnic cleansing already were in place before Israel became a state, Bazian said, because it clarifies the issue of responsibility when it comes to the Palestinian question. Many view both Israel and Palestine as innocent victims of events beyond their control. That view leads to the erroneous conclusion that neither is responsible for the situation in Palestine today, and as such both have equal narratives, Bazian said. But when one acknowledges that Zionism has at its core a plan to force the dispossession of the Palestinian people, it is possible then to assign responsibility to the oppressor and hold them accountable, making compensation to the injured party possible. “Eviction and dispossession were actual events and as such we can hold Israel or the Israeli society responsible,” Bazian said.

DISPOSSESSION

The Nakba in 1948 resulted in the expulsion of more than 750,000 Palestinians from their homeland. Several thousand more were displaced within the newly created state of Israel. After Israel’s Six Day War in June 1967, in which it illegally occupied the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, another 350,000 Palestinians were forced from their homes.

Palestinian refugees and those internally displaced (IDP) represent the largest and longest-standing case of forced displacement in the world today, according to Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Residency & Refugee Rights.

About 4.6 million refugees registered with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency in 2008. Nearly one-third of them live in 58 recognized refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

Dispossession continues today through a variety of programs and policies that deny Palestinians their human rights in violation of international law. What’s happening today is the direct result of the Nakba and the racist policies inherent in Zionist ideology.

“We (our government has been) playing a role in the Palestinian dispossession,” Bazian said. “The American public is involved and has been a partner with Israel from 1948 to the present.”
Today, the policies of cleansing the Holy Land of Palestinians can be clearly seen. Low-intensity transfers have been ongoing, according to Badil. Those living in the Occupied Territories have been most severely affected. For instance, between 1967 and 1986, some 21,000 Palestinians per year were displaced from their homes. Sources of direct and indirect transfer include revocation of residency rights, expulsion, home demolition, land confiscation as well as mass detention, torture, military closure and curfews.

And the policies are affecting Muslim and Christian Palestinians alike.

In “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid,” former President Jimmy Carter writes the Apartheid Wall on the south side of the Mount of Olives, where Christians believe Jesus delivered the Beatitudes, has cut off thousands of Christian worshippers from their church, Santa Marta Monastery. The house of worship now lies on the Israeli side of the 30-foot concrete barrier, and its parishioners cannot get permits allowing them to enter.

“For nine hundred years we have lived here under Turkish, British, Jordanian and Israeli governments, and no one has ever stopped people coming to pray. It is scandalous. This is not a barrier. It is a border. Why don’t they speak the truth?” Santa Marta's priest, Father Claudio Ghilardi, asked.

The Apartheid Wall that has displaced and isolated hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, Carter writes. The 170,000 citizens of Bethlehem, for instance, are not surrounded by the Wall, which has trapped another nearly 400,000 Palestinians on the Israeli side, cutting them off from their farmlands, gardens, jobs, schools and families, Carter writes.

“The Wall and disengagement plan are the culmination of 70 years of Zionist policy. The Palestinian ghettos that exist today serve a dual purpose: To exert severe economic and social pressure on the Palestinian population in order to force them to leave; and to allow complete control of the Palestinian population who remain in order to facilitate the expansion of the Jewish settlements onto their confiscated land.

Perhaps Ariel Sharon summed it up best when he said:
“You don’t simply bundle people onto trucks and drive them away … I prefer to advocate a more positive policy … to create, in effect, a condition that in a positive way will induce people to leave.” ~ former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, quoted in the article "Forcible Removal of Arabs gaining support in Israel” (The London Times, Aug. 24, 1988.

Israel has never recognized the right of refugees to return home, against the dictates of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights and UN Resolution 194. So while Israeli law will give instant citizenship to any Jew regardless of nationality, Palestinians who were born and raised in the Holy Land cannot return to live in their homeland. People who want to regain residency status after Israel revoked it for one reason or another or those wishing to get residency for a nonresident spouse must apply for family reunification. The process is limited by quotas and lack of transparency, according to Badil. In fact, between 1967 and the early 1990s, Israel approved fewer than 10 percent of all reunification applications, the agency reported.

Israel also uses home demolitions not only as collective punishment but also as a means to force Palestinians to leave. According to Badil, Israel has demolished more than 24,000 homes since 1967. The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions puts that number at just over 20,000 demolished homes. However, the figure doesn’t take into account the nearly 2,500 homes the IDF completely destroyed in the January 2009 Gaza offensive, according to the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights.

The genocidal attack on Gaza is another example of Zionist policy to ethnically cleanse Palestine. A report submitted on March 27, 2009, to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs says “the recent indiscriminate and disproportionate Israeli military attacks against Gaza resulted in unprecedented forcible mass displacement.”

Though the exact number of displaced people is not known, the report estimates at least 90,000 people – including 50,000 children – were displaced. Most of these people already were refugees from 1948.

Despite the dire news, Bazian thinks it still could be possible to redress the issues facing Palestinians today. After all, UN Resolution 194 gives Palestinians the right to return to their homeland and to be compensated for their lost properties. But nothing can be done without an immediate end to the occupation of the West Bank, Jerusalem and Gaza, Bazian said. “There must be justice and fairness in how to articulate a solution amenable to those who were injured in the process in the last 60 years.”

~ American Muslims for Palestine, April 2009 (Excerpted from "Preserving our Narrative"

====

All the above is from the AMP link which you foolishly thought would support your argument -

Hahahaha...



.......

 

Its pointless explaining + being defensive against ZioNasties , To them anyone who reject their crap is a "Jew-hating-facist/hollowcost denier/anti-semite.etc.etc.


Its one of their tactics :

[video=youtube;fV22eH11q0I]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fV22eH11q0I[/video]

 

Late edit to my post # 465 for Face Y -

"All the above is from the AMP link (what really happened )


http://www.ampalestine.org/index.php/history/al-nakba/284-the-nakba-what-really-happened


which you foolishly thought would support your argument - AMP is a site I've not visited before -

thanks for the link its disproves your claims.

Hahahaha...


.. GO LEARN - with an open mind . Beware of those who'd exploit - cash in on your emotional attachment. (wink)


...

 

All very good and fine Marlowe however, I'm still waiting for your proof that the confessions and testimony of the defendants at Nuremberg was gained by torture. You have yet to show this and, once you do, I will address and rip your other fables apart just as easily.

Proof please, show us the facts behind this silly utterance;

You have yet to show this. Once you have then we can move onto your other silly points.

 

disgusting how you enable their turning this thread into a Holocaust-denial debate.

 

How come you feel so snug?

 

If you wish to be personal use the PM feature and depending on how you phrase your personal question I may or may not answer but please, this is a political forum, not a Dr Laura support group.

 

O.k., for starters read here:

http://nseuropa.wordpress.com/2013/10/01/the-life-and-death-of-alfred-rosenberg/

Excerpt:

The victors were both, the accusers and the judges.
I will keep looking for torture stories to get you out of your snugness!

 

You must be very proud, of yourself missing the entire point of the discussion we were having entirely. Nobody said the Allies didn't torture Germans rather, Marlowe stated;

"With regard to confessions by Germans at war crimes trials, it is now well documented that many were obtained through coercion, intimidation and even physical torture. " and has continually failed to prove this point, even by using his home site - the neo Nazi based IHR.

Not that it matters but I suppose you felt smug about this when you posted it.

 

Of course they tortured Germans. That's not even a secret any longer. Americans and American Jews just loved to go for testicles. Almost like fetishism.

American Atrocities in Germany — the torture of accused “war criminals” in the Dachau trials

http://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2...f-accused-war-criminals-in-the-dachau-trials/

 

David Irving? Not only are you lazy in your research b ut are quoting from a man who lost two million in his court case against Deborah Lipstadt who proved he was a lying scumbag Holocaust denying antisemite.

Well done!

Next!