6 Wounded in Massive Rocket Attack from Gaza

Except that isn't what you're doing. You're just substituting someone else opinion for your own, one that fit with your world views. A world view that disregard realpolitik and the situation on the ground. If you really wanted to post the fact, as you say, you'd be also posting those opinions that goes contrary to your personal views. The world isn't all black and white. This isn't a binary system.

In school they teach you how to present a subject. First you set context, then you either go positive-negative-positive or negative-positive-negative, depending if you're pro or con the subject, then you write a conclusion. External sources are there to help you make your point, they're not there to make the point for you.

And finaly, stop accusing people. It can be considered a personal attack and that's against the rule and counterproductive on a discussion forum.

 

error

 

Always

 

No, this is not what was going on at all. You made some assertions which were not correct. I corrected them with reputable sources. You refused to accept the sources as that would mean you could not continue saying what you were saying as it was not true.

Fact one you say.

I responded to this by pointing out that what you said was not true and providing a link to meticulous researched study which illustrates that. I say

I then provided a long quote concerning the work Roosevelt had done in order to provide safe places for Jews and pointed out that this was not the only opportunity available. If you read the link I left you will read of this.

https://desip.igc.org/fromWhatPriceIsrael.html

Lilienthal, an American Conservative Jew wrote this book in 1953. He was well equipped to do so and his book is well furnished with sources. I know because I have a copy and have read it.

and finished by saying

Everything I have said is true and everything I said is backed up by reputable sources.

To this you replied

This wasn't about my 'viewpoint'. It was about correcting the incorrect information you gave. I cannot do that with my opinion. I can only do that by providing you with correct information which I did. It is that correct information that you do not want to accept. What you do not like is that research illustrates that the facts, the truth does not go with what you said and that is what you are complaining about. Nothing can be argued, no viewpoint formed until the correct facts are being used. You cannot even have a viewpoint worth the paper it is written on until you know the facts. It was your inaccurate facts I was addressing.

I have no problem in looking at my sources

Lilienthal, an American Conservative Jew wrote 'What Price Israel in 1953'. He was well equipped to do so and his book is well furnished with sources. I know because I have a copy and have read it.

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

The fact that he remained an antizionist till his death does nothing to take away from the reality that he knew what he was talking about, he worked in the State Department which was against the Partition Plan as I have already said and everything he writes has sources. He did not believe that Jews were a people, he believed that Jews were people who practice the religion Judaism which I think was the general view prior to the German invention of antisemitism which took over from the Christian Churche's 'jew hatred' at a time when Jews like Christians were giving up their religion and replaced the religious 'Jew hatred' with an antipathy based on the strange belief that because the religion that those who practice Judaism came from the ME, then clearly Jews were a different race who came from the ME - something which could never change even if they gave up Judaism. This view of Jews being a different 'race' to other Europeans was also taken up by the early Zionists and hence their desire for their own 'State' for their 'people'. There is a lecture about that which you can listen to here.

To Lilienthal the US was his country, the people of the US were his people and his religion was Judaism. He was an American Jew. Like most Jews of the time he abhorred racism and ethnic Nationalism. Those were his feelings and values - what it appears you call viewpoint. That however in no way lessons him being one of the people most capable of giving an accurate portrayal given that he was there at the time, was working in the State Department around that time and all his material is sourced with real sources.
All you are fighting against is the truth of the situation. You are fighting that by denying Facts.

Now as to the situation of the refugees or Displaced Persons. For a long time I had wondered why on earth the UK/US and other countries did not offer them mass immigration as then there would have been no need to put inordinate pressure on the UN for the Partition Plan to provide homes for people who had just endured the holocaust and who it was said now were stuck in Displaced Persons camps apparently saying they only wanted to go to Palestine.

Both of Finklesteins parents were in DP camps and they both wanted like many more to go to the US not Palestine, he said. However there was the most massive pressure put on people not to go anywhere but Palestine with them called traitors and so on, he said. The only reason his parents were both able to get to the US was because they had health problems which needed addressing he said. (Israel wanted fit immigrants).

So then I had been alerted to the reality that it may not be so that the Jewish DP's wanted to go to Palestine. The next time I heard about it was in 'What Price Israel'. Lilienthal did not have much information on this so did not say too much. However he did say that he doubted this and after the Partition plan had been passed at the UN the first poll was released which the New York Times reported on and if my memory serves me correct a whopping 80% of Jewish DP's wanted to move to the US and most certainly not to Palestine.

Both of those together gave me a pretty good hunch that what Finkelstein said was true. However when I found "In the Shadow of the Holocaust: The struggle between Jews and Zionists n the Aftermath of WW2" all doubt was gone. This is a meticulously researched book by an Israeli Jew. I suggested you read it as you can get a free pdf of it online which I linked to.

You are engaging in a lot of projection. My first post to you was completely courteous. You responded to this by totally ignoring everything I said with this

I have already put in the entirety of that post so it ought to be clear to anyone that what you are saying is not true. Unless you are wanting an autobiography or a science or mathematical text, you will invariable find that it is written by a researcher. What you need to assert then is whether that has bona fide links. Both, you only noticed one, of the books I spoke of did. That post was simply to correct your misunderstanding of the situation regarding DP Jews. Your believe that I should just put in an uninformed opinion is ridiculous. You put in misinformation. I corrected you. That appears to be what you cannot take. Now if I just put in my opinion of course you could correctly say that was just my opinion and argue against me. What you criticised was that I put in sources from which I had got my information. You did not like my putting in sources to back up what I said. There is no opinion on how DP's felt about moving to Israel. Their are facts. There is truth. There is reality. That is what you did not want and why you refused to address my post.

As I said before this is Post-Truth Politics, the desire being to keep everything emotional so that the truth remains hidden and all refutations are ignored. That is what I criticised you for and that criticism remains despite your personal attacks. Indeed post-truth is a time which is being considered from looking at history to be pre fascist.

https://www.vox.com/conversations/2...ism-europe-history-totalitarianism-post-truth.

Once again I am backing up what I said with a reputable source though I seem to remember Holocaust deniers do not like him.

Now I have three grandchildren arriving from Primary school wanting me to do homework with them and make them tea.

 

Not quite. According to the Mandate for "Palestine" Jews were called Jews and the rest were called "non-Jewish communities", as it was detayled in the preamble:

Source: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp

Now, I'm not making stuff up. If you dont believe me you would probably will believe your country, UK? or maybethe UN? Lets see what the report by His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan For the Year 1934, which this report can be found in the UN itself and according to the report "Palestine"'s location is:

Source: https://www.un.org/unispal/document...-of-the-mandatory-to-the-league-of-nations-3/

Which means "Palestine" in the year of 1934 is the area from Judean and Samaria tot he mideterean sea, and from Syria and LEbanon until Eilat, Umm al-Rashrash that lied between Egypt and Jordan (Jordan is lied in the territory that was named in 1934 "Trans-Jordan". )

I know that.

I never gone from one position to another. I always stated that "Palestine" as a state deos not exist, as it was never existed, but "Palestine" as a nickname for a territory was always there, and that "Palestine" is the Land of Israel".

I never said that there is or was ever nationaly of Israeli.

 

Lets see what the report by His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan For the Year 1934, which this report can be found in the UN itself and according to the report "Palestine"'s location is:

Source: https://www.un.org/unispal/document...-of-the-mandatory-to-the-league-of-nations-3/

Which means "Palestine" in the year of 1934 is the area from Judean and Samaria tot he mideterean sea, and from Syria and LEbanon until Eilat, Umm al-Rashrash that lied between Egypt and Jordan (Jordan is lied in the territory that was named in 1934 "Trans-Jordan". )

 

You talked about the position of the US State Department, and since the US State Department's position was to oppose, A Resolution that was passed several years ago in the US, and was binding the American Administration was quite opposite then the US State Department's position.

I never said that the UK wanted to established a Jewish state. Moreover, according to the Mandate for Palestine itself, the obligation that was on the Brits was to re-established a national home for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel, while the non-Jewish communities can only enjoy religious and civil rights:

Source: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp

Therefore, when Uk said that it's goal was to established a bi-nationl state is a breach for the international agreement in the form of the Mandate for Palesitne.

Once again, "Palestinians", as you showed here, was only a nickname of the total population that lived in the Land of Israel until 1948. Tho, "Palestinians" was never, and still isnt, a name of a defined people, adefined nation.

There was an opposition in the Zioninst Congress for eshtablishing a state for the Jews, correct, as there was Jews that soppurted an eshtablishment of a state for Jews, like there were Jews that said there is not such thing as "Jewish people", and Judaism is only a religion. Your point....?

Not quite. Terrirosm did not create Israel.
The Organizations that fought in the 1948 war, was not terrorists. Why? let's see what is the conditions for Terror:
* Terror idniscriminates for the porpuse of have an effect of fear on a targeted population.
* Terror is urban. Terror acts inside the urban territory, and that what makes terrot the anonymity effect.
* Terror does not required for the population to support it.
* Terror has no need for continuation on it's operations.

Guerrilla, on other hand is:
* the targets of the Guerrilla is the soldiers of the ruling power and it's symbols, and gerrila does not hurt civilian targets.
* Guerrilla exists in rural territories like mountains, forests and so on, and Gerrila utilized the rural territory it it's adventage.
* Guerrilla cant exist without the support of it's own population.
* Guerrilla needs continuation of it's operations.

Therefore, according to the conditions of each type of fighting, the Jewish organizations can be more classified as Guerrila then Terror, and that's because the organizations attacked the Mandatory power and it's symbols, the organizations always did operation after operation, and did not stop, it got support from it's own population, and maybe to only thing is that the organzations existed on urban territories and not rural.
Nevertheles we should remember that this kind of distinction between the two types is not unambiguous, and Guerrila organization can act sometimes as terror organizaion, as terror organization can act as Guerrila.
So yes, the Jewish organizaions did do operations and hurt civilian targets, nut eventually the organizations fought for the Brits will leave this territory.

For exenple, Hamas is often use Guerrila tactics, as operating from Urban territory, attacking soldiers and so on, tho it does not vanish the fact that Hamas is a terror organization.

The Partiotion Plan has no validity from 1947. The Partition Plan needed to accaptance of the both sides so it will get it's validity and will be binding. And still, while the Jews accepted it, the Arabs opposed it, what failed the potential of Resolution 181 to be fulfilled and to be binding.

Israel exist from 1948 according to the 1948 war and the Rhodes Agreements. The Partition Plan has nothing to do with it.

I never talked about the bible and religion about the Land of Israel, and thus your comment regarding what some Christians think is irrelevent to my comments, and thus to our disscusion. I dont care what the bible and religion say.

The case with the Ottoman Empire was cencelled once Hertzel came to the Ottoman Emperor and asked him for Charter to the Land of Israel. Once the Ottomans opposed it and did not allow Hertzel the Charter, he continued his efforts to get Charter from other countries like the UK. Then the UK did give him Charter for Oganda. Hertzel took the Brits's propusal to the Zionist Congress, and in the 7th annual meating of the Congress, that propusal was layed out.
The Jews that took part of the Congress did not accept the Oganda propusal, tho they said that it is one option if the objactive of getting to the Land of Israel will not work.

There is no diverstions, only a serious descussion about a serious topic.

 

so you're saying Palestine= Canaan

 

The world needs to understand that the Balfour Decleration and the Mandate for Palestine was not designed to make all of Palestine a "Jewish country".

In 1922 the British government sought to clarify what the Mandate was and what it was NOT!!!

and I quote:

"Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.' In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims "the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development."

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organization in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organization may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

During the last two or three generations the Jews have recreated in Palestine a community, now numbering 80,000, of whom about one fourth are farmers or workers upon the land. This community has its own political organs; an elected assembly for the direction of its domestic concerns; elected councils in the towns; and an organization for the control of its schools. It has its elected Chief Rabbinate and Rabbinical Council for the direction of its religious affairs. Its business is conducted in Hebrew as a vernacular language, and a Hebrew Press serves its needs. It has its distinctive intellectual life and displays considerable economic activity. This community, then, with its town and country population, its political, religious, and social organizations, its own language, its own customs, its own life, has in fact "national" characteristics. When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/churchill-white-paper-1922

 

"Plestine" is the Land of Israel, indeed. Cnaan was not in the lines of "Palestine".

 

wrong.

Canaan was within the borders of modern day Palestine

 

Not quite.
This is The Land of Israel ("Palestine"): (where is states "Jordan" is the territory of Trans-Jordan)


It's quite different from Cnaan.

 

Jewish Legion helped the British win Palestine from the Ottomans.

 

Exactly, AND THIS WAS SPELLED OUT TO THE ARABS AS WELL.
Think about it....
Had the Arabs allowed the Jews their settlements and cities they would
have controlled most of Palestine, and made a tiny sum out of it too.

... but that didn't work.

Had the Arabs agreed to the UN declaration on Palestine they would
have had total control of the West Bank.

... but that didn't work either.

And had the Arabs agreed on a land for peace swap after the Six Day
War (like Egypt eventually did) and the recent Gaza Withdrawal then
the Arabs could have entered into some amazing industrial parks and
agricultural cooperatives which could have exploited Jewish know-how
and capital and Arab labor to make Palestine the envy of the Middle
East. Instead we get Gaza TV exhorting kindergarten kids to become
martyrs for unwinnable wars. And it will be like this in 100 years time.

 

I enjoyed your writing, but the spelling had me stumped!
I spell bad, but I let the red wriggly underlines inform me
of errors and I left-click to fix.
Just say'n.