Rabbi Against Israel (Fox news interview)

124

Comments

  • the facethe face Posts: 192
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Why should anybody accept Israels right to exist whilst it continues to illegally occupy Palestinian land and flout international law.
    Why is the onus always, and only, on the Palestinians?

    Show us something that shows the land you speak of to ever have belonged to Palestinians? A link to a map, anything, Bueller, Bueller. UN 242 calls for all the warring sides to recongize the State of Israel as a pre-condition to the return of lands. Read it. The Palis never signed on. The Egyptians did. They got their shit back right away. So shut it with this international law crap already. Your just wrong....The Palis could have had a state in 48 and they could have had it again under Clinton. Easy. They seemed to prefer war. So war is what they got. The arabs still can't understand how a billion muslims cant get it together to defeat a tiny little nation of jews. That's what this is really all about anyways...It's not about the tiny piece of land. It's about their pride.
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    the face wrote:
    Especially, as you admit, your country participated in the crimes. So you are clearly not unbiased.

    Where does Kann say his/her country participated in 'the crimes'? What Kann said was "My country was deeply touched (and was involved unfortunately) by the nazi regime. France was occupied by the Nazis, of course they were deeply touched, of course they were 'involved' in the regime as they were 'governed' by them for a long time. Like in ANY occupied territory, there are collaborateurs either by greed or just trying to survive. But there are a majority of people fighting against the occupier - call them what you like: freedom fighters, partisans, maquis or even terrorists (depending if you see things from the occupier's or the oppressed people's point of view). I guess a French person will not be unbiaised about the nazis.. they had them in their country, it is a 'physical' part of their history.
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    the face wrote:
    The arabs still can't understand how a billion muslims cant get it together to defeat a tiny little nation of jews.

    ... backed and unconditionally supported by the largest power in the world. It would have been interesting to see how things would have developed over the decades if they did not have this blind support.
  • the facethe face Posts: 192
    redrock wrote:
    Where does Kann say his/her country participated in 'the crimes'? What Kann said was "My country was deeply touched (and was involved unfortunately) by the nazi regime. France was occupied by the Nazis, of course they were deeply touched, of course they were 'involved' in the regime as they were 'governed' by them for a long time. Like in ANY occupied territory, there are collaborateurs either by greed or just trying to survive. But there are a majority of people fighting against the occupier - call them what you like: freedom fighters, partisans, maquis or even terrorists (depending if you see things from the occupier's or the oppressed people's point of view). I guess a French person will not be unbiaised about the nazis.. they had them in their country, it is a 'physical' part of their history.

    Well that is really only partially true. The French were occupied largely in the northern half of their country before they flew the French hankie. The southern half was governed by a French government; the Vichy. AKA disgusting nazi collaborators. These lovely folks actually helped the Germans round up their jews. All 44,000 of them. You don't actually think the Germans handled that whole holocaust thing themselves do ya? They had lots of help...all over Europe. The Vichy French even engaged American and British troops in North Africa and Southeast Asia, desperate to hang on to their "empire" even if it meant collaborating with Nazis. So you see, it is not that simple. And it is not too hard to see why our "friends" in France are not really so friendly after all.
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    the face wrote:
    Show us something that shows the land you speak of to ever have belonged to Palestinians? A link to a map, anything, Bueller, Bueller.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:UN_Partition_Plan_Palestine.png

    Palestine was originally promised to the Arabs for helping overthrow the Ottomans. Then Britain decided to give it to the Jews as well. That is why the Arabs attacked Israel in what was called "The Six Day War" in 1967. It was then that Israel conquered all of Palestine, the Sheeba Farms in Syria and the Southern Part of Lebanon that gave rise to Hezbollah. Israel continued to occupy Lebanon until 2000 when Hezbollah drove Israel out, and Israel still occupies the Sheeba farms today.

    Oh, by the way. Israel is in violation of countless U.N. resolutions.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • the facethe face Posts: 192
    redrock wrote:
    ... backed and unconditionally supported by the largest power in the world. It would have been interesting to see how things would have developed over the decades if they did not have this blind support.

    Read a book would ya. I can suggest one if you would like. The Americans, if that is who you are referring to, did not back Israel in any of it's wars until 1973. In fact, The United States was so entrenched in 1967 with Vietnam that LBJ was furious at the Israelis. He leant only meager help. In 1948 no one helped the Jews. Not the Americans, the British or the French. So just do us a favor. Read. The Arabs were defeated because of their arrogance, not because of anything the United States did.
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    the face wrote:
    Read a book would ya. I can suggest one if you would like. The Americans, if that is who you are referring to, did not back Israel in any of it's wars until 1973. In fact, The United States was so entrenched in 1967 with Vietnam that LBJ was furious at the Israelis. He leant only meager help. In 1948 no one helped the Jews. Not the Americans, the British or the French. So just do us a favor. Read. The Arabs were defeated because of their arrogance, not because of anything the United States did.

    Or, maybe it was the Israeli attack on the U.S.S. Liberty...
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • the facethe face Posts: 192
    Ahnimus wrote:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:UN_Partition_Plan_Palestine.png

    Palestine was originally promised to the Arabs for helping overthrow the Ottomans. Then Britain decided to give it to the Jews as well. That is why the Arabs attacked Israel in what was called "The Six Day War" in 1967. It was then that Israel conquered all of Palestine, the Sheeba Farms in Syria and the Southern Part of Lebanon that gave rise to Hezbollah. Israel continued to occupy Lebanon until 2000 when Hezbollah drove Israel out, and Israel still occupies the Sheeba farms today.

    Oh, by the way. Israel is in violation of countless U.N. resolutions.

    Do you only read one side of the book? You are partially right. The British, who are really the primary villain in all of this, promised states to both the Arabs and the Jews for their support in both wars. Who did this? Primarily our pal Churchill. At the time of the Ottomans the Jews were quite prominent in British society and therefore, were needed to fight the Germans. So the British promised both sides a state. They ultimately just turned and ran when the place got too hot for them. What IS accurate is that in 1948 their was a British Mandate in Palestine. The UN resolved this issue by setting up two states, one Jewish, and one Arab. The Jews accepted this decision and the Arabs did not and launched their first of many disastrous wars.

    And your Sheeba Farms argument holds no water. It is Syrian territory. Syria refusued to accept 242 and therefore there is no land for peace there. Sorry.
  • the facethe face Posts: 192
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Or, maybe it was the Israeli attack on the U.S.S. Liberty...
    There must be an answer to you. First, Lebanon was not in any way involved in the 6 day war. And to be accurate, Israel actually shot first....I can recommend a book if youd like. Sorry no pictures
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    the face wrote:
    There must be an answer to you. First, Lebanon was not in any way involved in the 6 day war. And to be accurate, Israel actually shot first....I can recommend a book if youd like. Sorry no pictures

    Yea, that's what I said the "Israeli attack". I'm not interested in any of your books.

    By the way, here is a side-by-side of Israel's pre-1967 expansion beyond the 1947 UN borders.
    http://www.palestine-pmc.com/maps/19-5-1.jpg
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    the face wrote:
    Well that is really only partially true. The French were occupied largely in the northern half of their country before they flew the French hankie. The southern half was governed by a French government; the Vichy. AKA disgusting nazi collaborators. These lovely folks actually helped the Germans round up their jews. All 44,000 of them. You don't actually think the Germans handled that whole holocaust thing themselves do ya? They had lots of help...all over Europe. The Vichy French even engaged American and British troops in North Africa and Southeast Asia, desperate to hang on to their "empire" even if it meant collaborating with Nazis. So you see, it is not that simple. And it is not too hard to see why our "friends" in France are not really so friendly after all.

    You don't need to try and give me a lesson in French history. France was overwhelmed and capitulated and signed the armistice with Germany. Three fifths of the country were occupied, roughly to mid-France (well.. about to Vichy..), the west coast and the east coast. The Vichy governement was thus created - a puppet government for the germans. This government was not only for part of france but it administered the whole country. Nonetheless, the Vichy regime was acknowledged by the US and other countries as the official government of france and the US even granted them full diplomatic recognition! So hey... no one is perfect.

    This regime was seen as being traitors to France and was challenged by the Free French Forces. Also the resistance was doing what it could.

    I could go on forever, but this WW2 stuff has already been debated ad nauseam on this board and there is not need to start again.
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    the face wrote:
    Read a book would ya. I can suggest one if you would like. The Americans, if that is who you are referring to, did not back Israel in any of it's wars until 1973. In fact, The United States was so entrenched in 1967 with Vietnam that LBJ was furious at the Israelis. He leant only meager help. In 1948 no one helped the Jews. Not the Americans, the British or the French. So just do us a favor. Read. The Arabs were defeated because of their arrogance, not because of anything the United States did.

    Who was talking about 1948? Did I mention dates? Israel IS backed and supported by the US...

    Oh.. and on this book reading things... one can read many books but still not understand anything.... you seem to like to read a lot of books....
  • the facethe face Posts: 192
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Yea, that's what I said the "Israeli attack". I'm not interested in any of your books.

    By the way, here is a side-by-side of Israel's pre-1967 expansion beyond the 1947 UN borders.
    http://www.palestine-pmc.com/maps/19-5-1.jpg
    books aint your thing
  • KannKann Posts: 1,146
    the face wrote:
    UN 242 calls for all the warring sides to recongize the State of Israel as a pre-condition to the return of lands. Read it.

    No : Read it
    As for the vichy government, redrock said things better than I could.
    the face wrote:
    And it is not too hard to see why our "friends" in France are not really so friendly after all.
    As for this I don't know if I got it right but are you suggesting all French are collaborators and all germans are nazis? Anyways WWII is one (if not the) of the darkest part of my country's history, my government knows it and trust me it ensures all french citizens are made aware of this.

    Finally on reading books, I can't say I have read enough on the subject. I did live in Lebanon and Egypt though and have strong views on the subject that are this time clearly biaised. But nevertheless here is :
    an interesting read

    I guess all this is useless. People have been fighting on this subject for nearly 50 years with no results so the discussion is pointless.
    Good riddance anyways!
  • the facethe face Posts: 192
    redrock wrote:
    You don't need to try and give me a lesson in French history. France was overwhelmed and capitulated and signed the armistice with Germany. Three fifths of the country were occupied, roughly to mid-France (well.. about to Vichy..), the west coast and the east coast. The Vichy governement was thus created - a puppet government for the germans. This government was not only for part of france but it administered the whole country. Nonetheless, the Vichy regime was acknowledged by the US and other countries as the official government of france and the US even granted them full diplomatic recognition! So hey... no one is perfect.

    This regime was seen as being traitors to France and was challenged by the Free French Forces. Also the resistance was doing what it could.

    I could go on forever, but this WW2 stuff has already been debated ad nauseam on this board and there is not need to start again.

    they were treated as traitors. they signed on with the losers. had the allies lost they would have been the saviors and DeGaulle the traitor
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    the face wrote:
    So shut it with this international law crap already.

    This one sentence sums you up in a nut shell.
  • the facethe face Posts: 192
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Yea, that's what I said the "Israeli attack". I'm not interested in any of your books.

    By the way, here is a side-by-side of Israel's pre-1967 expansion beyond the 1947 UN borders.
    http://www.palestine-pmc.com/maps/19-5-1.jpg
    on that map. very unbiased. and are you palestinian out of curiosity>
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    the face wrote:
    Show us something that shows the land you speak of to ever have belonged to Palestinians?

    “The Balfour Declaration, made in November 1917 by the British Government...was made a) by a European power, b) about a non-European territory, c) in flat disregard of both the presence and wishes of the native majority resident in that territory...[As Balfour himself wrote in 1919], "‘The contradiction between the letter of the Covenant (the Anglo French Declaration of 1918 promising the Arabs of the former Ottoman colonies that as a reward for supporting the Allies they could have their independence) is even more flagrant in the case of the independent nation of Palestine than in that of the independent nation of Syria. For in Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country...The four powers are committed to Zionism and Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long tradition, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desire and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land."
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    the face wrote:
    books aint your thing

    Actually I have about 100 eBooks on programming in different languages. I have "The top 100 Selling Albums", "The Illustrated History of the Third Reich", "Physics: For Scientists and Engineers", "Developmental Psychology", "German for Travelers", "Best Karate: Fundamentals" and a bunch of books on computers and networking. But I mostly just stick to online information. Most of the books I read are pretty tough to be bias about.

    I wanted to learn about the Israel-Palestine conflict, so I watched probably a dozen documentaries by both sides of the conflict. Read through probably 100 historical websites from both sides of the conflict and even debated on here a lot.

    If I can learn all you know from one fucking book. That speaks volumes about your knowledge.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    the face wrote:
    on that map. very unbiased. and are you palestinian out of curiosity>

    Are you denying that Israel stole land prior to 1967? Are you also implying that any Palestinian account is a lie?
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    the face wrote:
    they were treated as traitors. they signed on with the losers. had the allies lost they would have been the saviors and DeGaulle the traitor

    ... and the world would be different now...

    What are you on?
  • the facethe face Posts: 192
    Byrnzie wrote:
    “The Balfour Declaration, made in November 1917 by the British Government...was made a) by a European power, b) about a non-European territory, c) in flat disregard of both the presence and wishes of the native majority resident in that territory...[As Balfour himself wrote in 1919], "‘The contradiction between the letter of the Covenant (the Anglo French Declaration of 1918 promising the Arabs of the former Ottoman colonies that as a reward for supporting the Allies they could have their independence) is even more flagrant in the case of the independent nation of Palestine than in that of the independent nation of Syria. For in Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country...The four powers are committed to Zionism and Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long tradition, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desire and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land."

    is this another Chomsky quote? Im well aware of Balfour and the duplicity of the British. Lets call a spade a spade. But for the need of England and France to maintain their brutal colonization of the Middle East, Africa, Asia, etc, the world would have been spared many wars, including the irresolvable conflict in the Middle East.
  • mookie9999mookie9999 Posts: 4,677
    the face wrote:
    then how do you explain Mel Gibson still getting movie deals

    He finances them himself.
    "The leads are weak!"

    "The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"

    "What's your name?"

    "FUCK YOU! THAT"S MY NAME!"
  • the facethe face Posts: 192
    redrock wrote:
    ... and the world would be different now...

    What are you on?

    truth
  • miller8966miller8966 Posts: 1,450
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Actually I have about 100 eBooks on programming in different languages. I have "The top 100 Selling Albums", "The Illustrated History of the Third Reich", "Physics: For Scientists and Engineers", "Developmental Psychology", "German for Travelers", "Best Karate: Fundamentals" and a bunch of books on computers and networking. But I mostly just stick to online information. Most of the books I read are pretty tough to be bias about.

    I wanted to learn about the Israel-Palestine conflict, so I watched probably a dozen documentaries by both sides of the conflict. Read through probably 100 historical websites from both sides of the conflict and even debated on here a lot.

    If I can learn all you know from one fucking book. That speaks volumes about your knowledge.

    get rid of the karate book..its probaly a load of garbage
    America...the greatest Country in the world.
  • the facethe face Posts: 192
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Are you denying that Israel stole land prior to 1967? Are you also implying that any Palestinian account is a lie?
    Well I was not a witness to any of it. In any conflict, the antagonists always write the history the way their side sees it. That occurs with any way. Im sure if you were to read a German or Japaneese middle school history book on World War 2 it would read very differently from the way English or American texts are written.

    Both sides have their points. I continue to acknowledge that Israel is not without blame. No nation is perfect. You, on the other hand, merely accept any pro-palestinian rag as being the gospel without question.

    I am sure the Palestinians maintain their land was stolen. The Israelis would say that many fled the war that was brought on them by the Palestinians and the united arab world in 1948 and came out the victor. History does not deny that the arabs uniformly started the 48 war. That they lost despite overwhelming numbers is simply further proof of their faliure as a united people.

    They have not once been succesful in their wars of aggression against Israel and now they need to resort to propoganda wars to get that which they only lost due to their own aggression. You will never acknolwedge the other side, and thus suffer the same short-sightedness as the Palestinians.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    the face wrote:
    I am sure the Palestinians maintain their land was stolen. The Israelis would say that many fled the war that was brought on them by the Palestinians and the united arab world in 1948 and came out the victor. History does not deny that the arabs uniformly started the 48 war. That they lost despite overwhelming numbers is simply further proof of their faliure as a united people.


    http://www.palestinecenter.org/palestine/1948war.html
    After World War II, Britain was unable to maintain control over Palestine and transferred responsibility to the United Nations (UN). The UN decided that the only means of resolving the escalating conflict between Jews and Arabs was to partition the land into two states. Although Jews constituted only one-third of the population and owned less than 7 percent of the land, the UN partition plan assigned 55 percent of Palestine’s territory to the Jewish state. In March 1948, Zionist forces launched major operations throughout Palestine. Their attacks were brutal. Through terror, psychological warfare, and direct conquests, Palestine was dismembered, many of its villages destroyed, and many of its people expelled as refugees. By the time the British withdrawal had been completed, Palestinian resistance had been largely broken. British evacuation and the Zionist leaders’ proclamation of the Israeli state on 15 May 1948—forcibly created beyond the area allotted to the Jewish community in the UN partition plan—prompted military intervention by the neighboring Arab states, precipitating the first Arab-Israeli war.

    Palestine was divided into three parts. The 1949 armistice agreements gave Israel control over 78 percent of the territory of British Mandate Palestine. Jordan occupied and annexed East Jerusalem and the hill country of central Palestine, thereafter known as the “West Bank” of the Jordan River. Egypt took temporary control of the coastal plain around the city of Gaza, later referred to as the Gaza Strip. Both Jordan and Egypt held on to these respective territories until the 1967 war, during which Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza. The Palestinian Arab state provided for in the United Nations partition plan was never established.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    http://www.pmwatch.org/pmw/snakebite/Wars.html

    Since the establishment of Israel there have been five major wars between Arabs and the Israelis. These wars occured in 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973 and 1982. Israel claims that the Arabs started all the wars. Although there has been low-intensity conflict in the intervening years and major conflagrations during the "War of Attrition" in 1969-1970 and the 1978 invasion of Lebanon, massive civil disobedience during the Uprising of 1988, and in 2000-2001 during the Al-Aqsa Intifada, it is these five wars Israel refers to when it makes its claims, creating the impression that Israel has only acted "in self-defence".


    The 1948 War


    Myth


    The roots of the 1948 war go as far back as the first recognition on the part of the Palestinians that the Zionists wished to establish a Jewish state on their land. In late 1947 the United Nations proposed that Palestine be divided into a Palestinian Arab state and a Jewish state. The UN Partition Plan recommended that 55 percent of Palestine, and the most fertile region, be given to the Jewish settlers who comprised 30 percent of the population. The remaining 45 percent of Palestine was to comprise a home for the other 70 percent of the population who were Palestinians. The Palestinians rejected the plan because it was unfair. Israel and its supporters claim that the Arabs first attacked in Janurary 1948 and then invaded Israel in May 1948.


    Fact


    The truth is that by May 1948 Zionist forces had already invaded and occupied large parts of the land which had been allocated to the Palestinians by the UN Partition Plan. In January 1948 Israel did not yet exist.


    The evidence that Israel started the 1948 war comes from Zionist sources. The History of the Palmach which was released in portions in the 1950s (and in full in 1972) details the efforts made to attack the Palestinian Arabs and secure more territory than alloted to the Jewish state by the UN Partition Plan (Kibbutz Menchad Archive, Palmach Archive, Efal, Israel). Already, Zionist forces were implementing their "Plan Dalet" to "control the area given to us [the Zionists] by the U.N. in addition to areas occupied by Arabs which were outside these borders and the setting up of forces to counter the possible invasion of Arab armies after May 15" (Qurvot 1948, p. 16, which covers the operations of Haganah and Palmach, see also Ha Sepher Ha Palmach, The Book of Palmach).



    1. Operation Nachson, 1 April 1948

    2. Operation Harel, 15 April 1948

    3. Operation Misparayim, 21 April 1948

    4. Operation Chametz, 27 April 1948

    5. Operation Jevuss, 27 April 1948

    6. Operation Yiftach, 28 April 1948

    7. Operation Matateh, 3 May 1948

    8. Operation Maccabi, 7 May 1948

    9. Operation Gideon, 11 May 1948

    10. Operation Barak, 12 May 1948

    11. Operation Ben Ami, 14 May 1948

    12. Operation Pitchfork, 14 May 1948

    13. Operation Schfifon, 14 May 1948



    The operations 1-8 indicate operations carried out before the entry of the Arab forces inside the areas allotted by the UN to the Arab state. It has to be noted that of thirteen specific full-scale operations under Plan Dalet eight were carried out outside the area "given" by the UN to the Zionists.



    Following is a list drawn from the New York Times of the major military operations the Zionists mounted before the British evacuated Palestine and before the Arab forces entered Palestine:

    * Qazaza (21 Dec. 1947)

    * Sa'sa (16 Feb. 1948)

    * Haifa (21 Feb. 1948)

    * Salameh (1 March 1948)

    * Biyar Adas (6 March 1948)

    * Qana (13 March 1948)

    * Qastal (4 April 1948)

    * Deir Yassin (9 April 1948)

    * Lajjun (15 April 1948)

    * Saris (17 April 1948)

    * Tiberias (20 April 1948)

    * Haifa (22 April 1948)

    * Jerusalem (25 April 1948)

    * Jaffa (26 April 1948)

    * Acre (27 April 1948)

    * Jerusalem (1 May 1948)

    * Safad (7 May 1948)

    * Beisan (9 May 1948).

    David Ben-Gurion confirms this in an address delivered to American Zionists in Jerusalem on 3 September 1950:

    "Until the British left, no Jewish settlement, however remote, was entered or seized by the Arabs, while the Haganah, under severe and frequent attack, captured many Arab positions and liberated Tiberias and Haifa, Jaffa and Safad" (Ben-Gurion, Rebirth and Destiny of Israel (N.Y.: Philosophical Library, 1954, p. 530).


    Although late PM Ben-Gurion speaks of "liberating" Jaffa it was alloted to the Palestinians by the UN Partition Plan.

    Late PM Menachem Begin adds: "In the months preceding the Arab invasion, and while the five Arab states were conducting preparations, we continued to make sallies into

    Arab territory. The conquest of Jaffa stands out as an event of first-rate importance in the struggle for Hebrew independence early in May, on the eve [that is, before the alleged Arab invasion] of the invasion by the five Arab states" (Menachem Begin, The Revolt, Nash, 1972, p. 348)

    On 12 December 1948 David Ben Gurion confirmed the fact that the Zionists started the war in 1948: "As April began, our War of Independence swung decisively from defense to attack. Operation 'Nachson'...was launched with the capture of Arab Hulda near where we stand today and of Deir Muheisin and culminated in the storming of Qastel, the great hill fortress near Jerusalem" (Ben Gurion, Rebirth and Destiny of Israel (N.Y.: Philosophical Library, 1954, p. 106).


    Israeli historians have themselves refuted the claim that the Arabs started the 1948 war. Benny Morris uncovered a report from the Israeli Defense Force Intelligence Branch (30 June 1948) that shows a deliberate Israeli policy to attack the Arabs should they resist and expel the Palestinians (Benny Morris, "The Causes and Character of the Arab Exodus from Palestine: the Israel Defense Forces Intelligence Branch Analysis of June 1948", Middle Eastern Studies, XXII, January 1986, pp. 5-19).


    Conclusion

    In sum, it is not true that the Arabs "invaded Israel" in 1948.


    First, Israel did not exist at the time of the alleged invasion as an established state with recognised bounderies. When the Zionist leaders established Israel on 15 May 1948 they purposely declined to declare the bounderies of the new state in order to allow for future expansion.


    Secondly, the only territory to which the new state of Israel had even a remote claim was that alloted to the Jewish state by the UN Partition Plan. But the Zionists had already attacked areas that were alloted to the Palestinian Arab state.


    Thirdly, those areas which the Arab states purportedly "invaded" were, in fact, exclusively areas alloted to the Palestinian Arab state proposed by the UN Partition Plan. The so-called Arab invasion was a defensive attempt to hold on to the areas alloted by the Partition Plan for the Palestinian state.


    Finally, the commander of Jordan's Arab Legion, was under orders not to enter the areas alloted to the Jewish state (Sir John Bagot Glubb, "The Battle for Jerusalem", Middle East International, May 1973).
  • 4 years later.

    reading through the comments. nothings changed. the Palestinians are still subject to cruel and inhumane treatment every single day.

    not a damn thing has changed.

    except user names.

    and old friends gone.


    we are what we do. actions speak louder than words. words are not enough anymore because fuckall is changing.
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    4 years later.

    reading through the comments. nothings changed. the Palestinians are still subject to cruel and inhumane treatment every single day.

    not a damn thing has changed.

    except user names.

    and old friends gone.


    we are what we do. actions speak louder than words. words are not enough anymore because fuckall is changing.


    as an example....my mom is your typical american. i don't think she would have heard about something like the attack on the flotilla 4 years ago.


    now she's an expert on israeli brutality.





    my point is regular americans are becoming more and more aware of israeli crimes. hasbara is becoming less and less effective.




    critical mass will be reached, and things will change.


    look at apartheid south africa. imagine how tough that must have been to get support for. but it changed, and it ended. as will the israeli siege.
Sign In or Register to comment.