News From Gaza

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm sorry, since when is it anyone else's reponsibility to support your fanaticism?

I am just saying; I will never give up my desire to live in the land. I highly doubt the Jews ever will...they haven't for this long. So either they will have to keep dealing with it...or exterminate them. To achieve the acquisition they have screwed up a LOT of world politics, and this will not cease. Since Arabs are unwilling to give up 1% of their land, then the latter is their only option.

Now...go ahead and try.
 
You're American, look around you. There is plenty of land without stealing that of some poor sod in Palestine.
 
-1948 Borders after 1948 War of Independence, when Egypt, Trans-Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq invaded the country.
mapHistWar1947.jpg

MapWarHistARM1949.jpg

After the 1948 these were the armistice lines. Note that the aggressors lost land.
That's funny because 2 of your supposed aggressor nations gained land. Israel also gained land. All of it palestinian. Which begs the question why Israel has the right to give away land that isn't theirs as part of a peace deal.
 
"The U.N. Resolution 181 partition plan was to divide the remaining 25% of Palestine into a Jewish Palestinian State and a SECOND Arab Palestinian State (Trans-Jordan being the first) based upon population concentration. The Jews accepted --- the Arabs rejected. They still wanted ALL. On May 14, 1948 the Palestinian Jews finally declared their own State of Israel"
wow the dishonesty of this statement is awe inspiring. There was only one proposed palestinian state. Trans-jordan was Jordinian. The Jordanians were a seperate political entity. It was Palestinian jews that declared there own state. in 1948 most of the jews were european jews not palestinian.
 
Palestinians didn't exist in 1948. The term was given to the people AFTER much much time. The people themselves did exist, but they were just part of the Arab world inhabiting that region. They didn't really have a governing body other than perhaps their Sharia law. Because of their inability to understand law, they had no claim over the land. Thus when rich Jews moved in and started purchasing land they could claim it a state, as at the time there was no state imposing over the region....accept perhaps Britain. Which succeeded the land upon independence (after fighting). The original aggression of the neighboring states was due to the fact that much of that region had been training for WWII believe it or not, and a pact with NAZI Germany. How strange...

The aggression was a result of the propaganda that German backed Arab states were giving to their people...that's right...they had the same propaganda as the Germans did in WWII (Looks like you WERE part of this). When Jews moved in, they saw it as a continuation of the situation and felt with their inability to run...success would finally be theirs. They were wrong. The attacks failed and the "arab state" referenced is nothing more than the attempted creation of an Arab state simultaneous to the loss of imposed British mandates. Their failure was caused by the war, at this time for legitimize the people of the land different surrounding Arab states annexed the land and put them inside their mandate.

Ironically their succession from Lebanon in the late 80's and early 90's was backed by Israel, and the assistance of the IDF was needed in order to grant moderate independence from imposition. The land they maintained momentarily began to be lost due to the civil rights violations they enacted against Israel, at this moment annexation was imposed by Israel. Which was the second annexation (After Lebanon). Even more ironically Lebanon began to support the very people who had succeeded from it, but at this time it was under different leadership. The previous Lebanon was ruled by atleast a moderately independent governing body, now that governing body was funded through 3rd party nations.

The same myth that there ever was a palestine considered illegitimate by Lebanon until it came to benefit the 3rd party trustees in Lebanon at which time the Arab world legitimized the "state" of Palestine retroactively! Documentation at this time was altered to reflect a perpetual existence of the state and history was literally revised in much of the region under the name of "Realizing the truth, in our mistakes". A kind way of giving the people living in the region the feeling that their governments strictly enforce the truth at any costs.

So you can claim it a legitimate state all you want, but it never existed. Your governments lie to, and they spread propaganda. You can call me a NAZI, but it was your NAZI training during WWII in the region that caused the initial conflict.
 
Palestinians didn't exist in 1948. The term was given to the people AFTER much much time. The people themselves did exist, but they were just part of the Arab world inhabiting that region. They didn't really have a governing body other than perhaps their Sharia law. Because of their inability to understand law, they had no claim over the land. Thus when rich Jews moved in and started purchasing land they could claim it a state, as at the time there was no state imposing over the region....accept perhaps Britain. Which succeeded the land upon independence (after fighting). The original aggression of the neighboring states was due to the fact that much of that region had been training for WWII believe it or not, and a pact with NAZI Germany. How strange...
Its funny you should mention the Nazis because while the Palestinians were dealing with the british(something I have never heard the Palestinian jews of doing) the jewish terror groups that were targeting arabs and the british were dealing with the nazis. The British gave up the land before independence not after. Yes most of the area was training for WW2 the british recruited troops in most of their colonies. In fact serving in the British army was the deal the palestinians brokered with the british to gain their country. I am not going to bother dealing with the Bigoted crap in their

The aggression was a result of the propaganda that German backed Arab states were giving to their people...that's right...they had the same propaganda as the Germans did in WWII (Looks like you WERE part of this). When Jews moved in, they saw it as a continuation of the situation and felt with their inability to run...success would finally be theirs. They were wrong. The attacks failed and the "arab state" referenced is nothing more than the attempted creation of an Arab state simultaneous to the loss of imposed British mandates. Their failure was caused by the war, at this time for legitimize the people of the land different surrounding Arab states annexed the land and put them inside their mandate.
The agression you mention as far as i could tell was the arab states moving troops into the PALESTINIAN PART to try and prevent full blown civil war happening. I believe that if jewish troops weren't in there the war would have never happened.



So you can claim it a legitimate state all you want, but it never existed. Your governments lie to, and they spread propaganda. You can call me a NAZI, but it was your NAZI training during WWII in the region that caused the initial conflict.
I never claimed palestine as a legitimate state, it was never was allowed to form by Israel, I believe that the Palestinian claim to the is legitimate and a Palestinian nation should be allowed to form. Keep on believing all the Israeli propaganda and ignoring the Palestinian or you could do what i have done and try and gleam the real truth.
 
Palestinians didn't exist in 1948.
According to the online 2007 edition of Encyclopedia Brittanica the first widespread use of "Palestinian" as an endonym to refer to the nationalist concept of a Palestinian people by the local Arabic-speaking population of Palestine began prior to the outbreak of World War I.

More to the point in Porath's 1974 work The Emergence of the Palestinian-Arab National Movement, 1918-1929 he observes, on page 117 "the first demand for national independence was issued by the Syrian-Palestinian Congress on 21 September 1921".

The Encyclopedia Brittanica enjoys a good reputation for accuracy. I am not an expert in this area but I understand that Yehoshua Porath who is Professor Emeritus of Middle East History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem is also well thought of.

Are you stating that both of these sources are flawed. Could you provide sources that substantiate your own claim please.
 
Last edited:
Its funny you should mention the Nazis because while the Palestinians were dealing with the british(something I have never heard the Palestinian jews of doing) the jewish terror groups that were targeting arabs and the british were dealing with the nazis. The British gave up the land before independence not after. Yes most of the area was training for WW2 the british recruited troops in most of their colonies. In fact serving in the British army was the deal the palestinians brokered with the british to gain their country. I am not going to bother dealing with the Bigoted crap in their

The agression you mention as far as i could tell was the arab states moving troops into the PALESTINIAN PART to try and prevent full blown civil war happening. I believe that if jewish troops weren't in there the war would have never happened.



I never claimed palestine as a legitimate state, it was never was allowed to form by Israel, I believe that the Palestinian claim to the is legitimate and a Palestinian nation should be allowed to form. Keep on believing all the Israeli propaganda and ignoring the Palestinian or you could do what i have done and try and gleam the real truth.

Love the revisionism here, smells of eggs though.
 
Doesn't the legitimacy of a "Jewish state" created by fiat on land already occupied (for almost 2000 years), require the Jewish revision of history every, say decade or so?

Except those who forget the real history get condemned to something or other.
 
Where are the jackboot-wearing Israeli soldiers in the first picture? Why aren't they in there alongside their Aryan German brothers? Where is the accompanying text to describe the Jewish 'struggle', the genocidal tactics, the terrorist campaigns against Arab civilians?

What happened to the reference to Israel removing the Arab curse from the face of the earth, and how Jews want the destruction of Palestine?
 
Are you stating that both of these sources are flawed. Could you provide sources that substantiate your own claim please.
In a series of pm's PeskyShit has prevaricated, vacillated, erected strawmen, performed a triple back sumersault with pike, but has utterly failed to acknowledge that his statements regarding the origin of the term Palestine and Palestinian is badly flawed.
PMs are of course exactly that - personal. It is bad etiqutte to share them with the world at large. I do not believe that etiquette applies to what I wrote. This is the text of the last but one pm to PeskyShit. (The final pm is more vitriolic.)
Please stick to the point. I am not debating any of what you said in your last pm. I am declaring that your statement that Palestinians didn't exist before 1948 is wrong. Now please, a simple yes or no. Was your statement wrong or not? Stop prevaricating. There is nothing wrong in being wrong, but there is most decidedly something wrong in avoiding admitting it. And I still leave you the option of demonstrating my sources are flawed. (If you choose to go down that route could I draw your attention to Herodotus' History, Book 1, Paragraph 105. He refers to Palestine. Perhaps it's an artifact of translation.)
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_of_Palestine

Mostly Palestine was a country created from the arguments of Emir/King Faisal and the British Empire.

It is also the child of the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement and the secret WWI, French-English, Sykes–Picot Agreement.

FeisalPartyAtVersaillesCopy.jpg


Faisal at Versailles 1919, with T.E Lawrence(possibly the only European to give a shit for Arab Sovereignty). The African in the back is Faisal's Slave.

No one is power is "good".
 
...The term {name of the people living on the land} was given to the people AFTER much much time. The people themselves did exist, but they were just ... inhabiting that region. They didn't really have a governing body other than perhaps their {Religious} law. Because of their inability to understand {civil} law, they had no claim over the land. ...When {more modern people, with civil laws, etc.} moved in, they saw it as a continuation of the situation and felt with their inability to run...success would finally be theirs. They were wrong. ...
Although not intended as a general history of how and why techincally advanced people, such as Europeans, interacted with the local natives to gain the land, it is how it always happens.


For example, the American Indians did not have any concept of deeds or ownership of land. When some Dutch entered what is now NYC and offered a few beads etc. for some marks on a paper, those Indian rapidly agreed. They were sure that they were taking advantage of the foolish Dutch who thought that humans could own land, but as you said: "They were wrong."

It is the old, often repeated, story: "Might makes right."*
---------------------
*Especially property rights that armies and / or police with superior weapons can enforce.

PS. Every deed now existing anywhere in the world was originally created basically by this process. Israel's are no exception. - just they happen to have been done in the age of TV.
 
Every deed now existing anywhere in the world was originally created basically by this process. Israel's are no exception

Was it? "Israelis" were given the land by the UN and British. Who apparently stand for self determination of peoples.
 
Was it? "Israelis" were given the land by the UN and British. Who apparently stand for self determination of peoples.
Sam - you are not so naive as to believe that are you? Just yesterday the British released some previously secrete papers that show they were strongly considering sitting WWII out with an agreement:

Hitler was to get main land Europe and the Brits the rest of the world (not already controlled by America or other major powers.)

Probably Nevil Chamberland's visit to Hitler was to make that deal. -He must have thought he had succeeded as he returned to tell that he had "Assured Peace in our Times."

Nothing could have been easier for the Brits and UN to do than to give away land now ISRAEL. - THEY WERE NOT GIVING ANY ON THEIR ISLAND.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sam - you are not so naive as to believe that are you? Just yesterday the British released some previously secrete papers that show they were strongly considering sitting WWII out with an agreement:

Hitler was to get main land Europe and the Brits the rest of the world (not already controlled by America or other major powers.)

Probably Nevil Chambeland's visit to Hitler was to make that deal. -He must have thought he had suceeded as he returned to tell that he had "Assured Peace in our Times."

Oh I know how hypocritical the British can be. Just look at all their colonies as an example; Sudan, Sri Lanla, Ireland, India, Palestine, Canada, Australia, America - what place did they not divide and rule?

But apparently, we're supposed to accept their pronouncements as the law. Or we're insurgents and terrorists.:rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top