15 May 21
1 edit
@shavixmir saidBoth sides practiced guerilla warfare and terrorism. BOTH. Not getting involved with that. This is a simple point Im making in response to EoT's argument about the Jews OBEYING THE LAW, and UN guidelines now. There came a time in 1947 when after decades of civil unrest the ruling power, the British, together with UN formulated a 3 state plan. The Jews accepted, and the Palestinians did not. The Palestinians reason for not accepting the plan was that they wanted no partition. NONE. They wanted the Jews OUT or DEAD. Argue with that. They started the war and refused to OBEY THE LAW.
I think you have to google the Stern gang (Lehi), the Irgun, etc.
Then you’ll grasp a scope of what was happening.
Besides the fact that Israel took more land than they were given by the UN. Besides the fact that the land they were given was inhabited by Palestinians. Who they ethnically cleansed.
Like rolling barrels of oil on fire downhill towards their villages...
Stick with the facts, or provide your opinions. Just understand the difference.
15 May 21
@mott-the-hoople saidHamas fired the rockets, no doubt.
palestinian “defense”...I will ask you again, who fired the first rocket?
WGAF about convincing you of anything?
Before that, who was firing tear gas and rubber bullets INSIDE a muslim mosque, for godssake.
The Israelis have no right ruling over the palestinians there, that is the point.
15 May 21
@Rajk999 - said
The Arabs rejected the partition, not because it was supposedly unfair, but because their leaders rejected any form of partition.
The Palestinians wanted NO PARTITION. They wanted all the land for themselves.
Really!?!? Like the Palestinians are supposed to enjoy westerners taking half their land?? Jeeezus.
I wouldn't want the UN dividing America in two and giving half to - say, the Kurds, either.
15 May 21
@earl-of-trumps saidYou are clearly in the wrong here. All over the world, Covid guidelines, about social distancing and large groups are still in force. The mosques during Ramadhan have to abide by these rules. They refused so the police rightfully came in. After a while the worshippers came into the mosques with stones and rocks [their weapons of choice]. So battle ensued, rubber bullets v stones and rocks. Hamas was itching for a fight. So here we are now.
Hamas fired the rockets, no doubt.
Before that, who was firing tear gas and rubber bullets INSIDE a muslim mosque, for godssake.
The Israelis have no right ruling over the palestinians there, that is the point.
@Rajk999 - said
they wanted no partition. NONE. They wanted the Jews OUT or DEAD. Argue with that. They started the war and refused to OBEY THE LAW.
There is no argument that the Pals wanted the Jews out, because the Jews killed and uprooted so many Palestinians.
700,00 Pals uprooted in the 1947 cleansing alone. What are the Pals supposed to do, welcome in Jews with open arms??
And the Pals concerns proved to be correct as 1967 occurred with another great uprooting of Pals and and land theft.
This was ALL started by the invading Euro Zionist Jews. No need of this crap
15 May 21
@earl-of-trumps saidI notice that now you are ignoring YOUR CALL for people to enforce OBEYING THE LAW. Why dont you admit that it is the Palestinians that ignored the British and the UN. They started the hostilities and tried to wipe out the Jews in 1948. The Jews were fine with the original partition. The Palestinians wanted ALL.
@Rajk999 - said
The Arabs rejected the partition, not because it was supposedly unfair, but because their leaders rejected any form of partition.
The Palestinians wanted NO PARTITION. They wanted all the land for themselves.
Really!?!? Like the Palestinians are supposed to enjoy westerners taking half their land?? Jeeezus.
I wouldn't want the UN dividing America in two and giving half to - say, the Kurds, either.
@rajk999 saidThe partition plan in 1947 was not "the Law" and the Palestinians were under no obligation to accept it.
Both sides practiced guerilla warfare and terrorism. BOTH. Not getting involved with that. This is a simple point Im making in response to EoT's argument about the Jews OBEYING THE LAW, and UN guidelines now. There came a time in 1947 when after decades of civil unrest the ruling power, the British, together with UN formulated a 3 state plan. The Jews accepted, and the Pales ...[text shortened]... to OBEY THE LAW.
Stick with the facts, or provide your opinions. Just understand the difference.
It would have left a discontinuous Palestinian State and an Israel with almost as many Muslims as Jews but declared to be a Jewish State.
15 May 21
@no1marauder saidYou are mistaken. The British took over Palestine in 1920, therefore Palestine was a British Overseas Territory. They would have had a Governor, administrative offices, an army etc etc. The British was the LAW. Also they would have owned all the state lands. This excludes lands properly owned by others.
The partition plan in 1947 was not "the Law" and the Palestinians were under no obligation to accept it.
It would have left a discontinuous Palestinian State and an Israel with about as many Muslims as Jews but declared to be a Jewish State.
In 1947 together with the UN, they partitioned the land. That is their right granted to them by the UN. The indigenous Palestinians only owned about 4% of the land. The Jews about 8% and outsiders about 25%. The balance was state property. Obviously there would have been many squatters, mostly Palestinians.
Of course the Palestinians were under no obligation to accept the British or UN's authority. That is their choice, and they chose also to try to wipe out the Jews. They are still trying 70 years later.
15 May 21
@rajk999 saidNo, it wasn't. The Partition Plan was a non-binding resolution from the UN General Assembly which recommended a plan. The British never implemented it due to objections of the majority of the People in Palestine.
You are mistaken. The British took over Palestine in 1920, therefore Palestine was a British Overseas Territory. They would have had a Governor, administrative offices, an army etc etc. The British was the LAW. Also they would have owned all the state lands. This excludes lands properly owned by others.
In 1947 together with the UN, they partitioned the land. That is thei ...[text shortened]... their choice, and they chose also to try to wipe out the Jews. They are still trying 70 years later.
Historical ignorance like you exhibit is typical of defenders of Zionist crimes.
15 May 21
@rajk999 saidHere's the GA Resolution, 181, regarding the Partition Plan: https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/7F0AF2BD897689B785256C330061D253
You are mistaken. The British took over Palestine in 1920, therefore Palestine was a British Overseas Territory. They would have had a Governor, administrative offices, an army etc etc. The British was the LAW. Also they would have owned all the state lands. This excludes lands properly owned by others.
In 1947 together with the UN, they partitioned the land. That is thei ...[text shortened]... their choice, and they chose also to try to wipe out the Jews. They are still trying 70 years later.
Note the language:
"Recommends to the United Kingdom"
"Requests that"
"Calls upon the inhabitants of Palestine"
"Appeals to all Governments and all peoples"
That is not LAW.
15 May 21
@no1marauder saidGet your facts straight. Palestinians did not own, neither govern the area. They had no country there. They were always SUBJECT TO some authority. At some point it was the Ottoman Empire, then Egypt, then the British. They British made the rules, and the rules were that the land was to be partitioned. If they objected and they did, then they can fight over it. They did. They are the aggressors and they tried to wipe out the Jews. They failed, and they lost. End of story.
No, it wasn't. The Partition Plan was a non-binding resolution from the UN General Assembly which recommended a plan. The British never implemented it due to objections of the majority of the People in Palestine.
Historical ignorance like you exhibit is typical of defenders of Zionist crimes.
Defenders of Palestinians failures and blunders try to rewrite history.
15 May 21
@no1marauder saidLike I said, the BRITISH WERE THE LAW.
Here's the GA Resolution, 181, regarding the Partition Plan: https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/7F0AF2BD897689B785256C330061D253
Note the language:
"Recommends to the United Kingdom"
"Requests that"
"Calls upon the inhabitants of Palestine"
"Appeals to all Governments and all peoples"
That is not LAW.
15 May 21
@rajk999 saidThe Palestinian People had a Natural Right to self-determination enshrined in the UN Charter. https://unpo.org/article/4957#:~:text=Essentially%2C%20the%20right%20to%20self,economic%2C%20cultural%20and%20social%20development.
Get your facts straight. Palestinians did not own, neither govern the area. They had no country there. They were always SUBJECT TO some authority. At some point it was the Ottoman Empire, then Egypt, then the British. They British made the rules, and the rules were that the land was to be partitioned. If they objected and they did, then they can fight over it. They did. They ...[text shortened]... they lost. End of story.
Defenders of Palestinians failures and blunders try to rewrite history.
Governments don't own People and under international law can't do anything they please with them. Moreover, the British Mandate in Palestine was a limited one subject to: " it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine". https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp
15 May 21
@no1marauder saidWell if you take that view then there was no law. So its like the wild wild west. If there is no law then there are no crimes. Land is up for grabs. The Palestinians lost then, and have lost all battles for the last 70 years. So we agree.
No, they weren't but even if they were, they never implemented the Partition Plan.