On 29/08/2026 in message <116uubv$3bjrg$1@dont-email.me> GB wrote:
On 28/08/2026 14:47, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Jeff, you've skipped a fairly interesting point.Then please explain why it is acceptable for Palestinians, who had
been living in Palestine for over 1,000 years and so "owned"
Palestine by right of occupation,
If ownership is obtained by occupying the land, how far back do you look?
If you are short-sighted and only look back say 50 years, then the
land is 100% owned by the present occupiers.
Look back 150 years, and it's 50/50 Arab/Jewish.
Look back 1000 years, and it's 92.5% Arab/7.5% Jewish
Look back 5000 years, and it's 30% Arab/70% Jewish.
And, of course, the boundaries were different 5000 years ago, and the
whole of the West Bank was part of Israel.
So, I think this occupation argument you raised is unhelpful, because
you can get any answer you want.
I think I was clear about this, in 1947 when terrorists started to
occupy Palestine...
On 29/08/2026 19:14, JNugent wrote:
I am certainly not here to carry a flag for Israel and do not do so. I
think I indicated somewhere above (only a few lines above, in fact)
that not all of Israel's behaviour has been above reproach - in my
opinion.
Anyone who worked in an almost exclusively male environment in the
1960s would have heard directly from men - colleagues - who had done,
or knew someone who had done - their late 1940s National Service in
"Mandatory Palestine". What they said about the actions - some of them
atrocities - carried out ostensibly on behalf of the imminent Israel
and most of them against British soldiers.
And I wasn't too impressed with the Hollywood version of it in the
movie "Exodus" (c. 1960) which made terrorism look like a jolly jape.
Despite all of that, I am not going to join the ranks of the anti-
semitic. Knowing - as we all do - what happened in (mainly eastern)
Europe 1939 - 1945, I understand the modern Jewish willingness to
fight back and avoid things like:
QUOTE (from above):
1. Azzam Pasha: [ ... ] "Personally I hope the Jews do not force us
into this war because it will be a war of elimination and it will be
a dangerous massacre which history will record similarly to the
Mongol massacre or the wars of the Crusades" [and] "We will sweep
them [the Jews] into the sea."
2. Syrian president Shukri al-Quwatli: "We shall eradicate Zionism."
ENDQUOTE
I have used those only because someone quoted them above.
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
Do they inspire you
to feel protective towards Israel? Should we see Israel as an infant
state struggling to survive against predatory animals that want to tear
it to pieces?
Here's something more up to date.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/aug/29/nbc-news-team-attacked-west-bank
Palestinian woman and NBC News team reportedly attacked in West Bank
A Palestinian woman and an NBC News team are reported to have been
attacked and injured by masked Israeli settlers in the Israeli-occupied
West Bank on Saturday, amid worsening confrontations in the area.
The attack occurred when four members of the news team were interviewing
Aida Ahmed Abdullah and her family in the Palestinian town of Jalud,
near Nablus. Abdullah told the outlet that they had been driven out of
their home by settlers, and the team was walking down a hill toward the house.
A car with Israeli license plates reversed up the hill toward them. At
least four men with their faces covered leapt from the vehicle, hitting
them with sticks and throwing rocks. rCLThey jumped out, beat us, then
jumped back in the car,rCY said NBC News correspondent Matt Bradley.
Bradley was hit twice in the arm and treated at a nearby clinic.
Several violent incidents in the area were reported on Saturday.
Palestinian workers were pepper-sprayed in nearby Qusra by masked
Israeli settlers.
Earlier this month, a group of settlers began blocking supplies from
entering Palestinian houses on the outskirts of the village near Nablus, trapping residents inside and drawing strong criticism from the US ambassador.
the settler attacks, condemned the rCLcriminal acts of violencerCY and
blamed rCLa handful of rioters who violate the law, cause enormous
injustice to the law-abiding settler public, hinder the IDF in
fulfilling its missions and harm IsraelrCOs standing in the worldrCY.
On 29/08/2026 10:47 PM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 29/08/2026 in message <116uubv$3bjrg$1@dont-email.me> GB wrote:
On 28/08/2026 14:47, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Jeff, you've skipped a fairly interesting point.Then please explain why it is acceptable for Palestinians, who had >>>>>>been living in Palestine for over 1,000 years and so "owned" >>>>>>Palestine by right of occupation,
If ownership is obtained by occupying the land, how far back do you look? >>>
If you are short-sighted and only look back say 50 years, then the
land is 100% owned by the present occupiers.
Look back 150 years, and it's 50/50 Arab/Jewish.
Look back 1000 years, and it's 92.5% Arab/7.5% Jewish
Look back 5000 years, and it's 30% Arab/70% Jewish.
And, of course, the boundaries were different 5000 years ago, and the >>>whole of the West Bank was part of Israel.
So, I think this occupation argument you raised is unhelpful, because
you can get any answer you want.
I think I was clear about this, in 1947 when terrorists started to
occupy Palestine...
Can that possibly be regarded as an unbiased entry to discussion in a
spirit of enquiry?
I suggest that it cannot.
You had your mind made up long before this discussion was started.
On 30/08/2026 in message <nfh7ptF712uU1@mid.individual.net> JNugent wrote:
On 29/08/2026 10:47 PM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 29/08/2026 in message <116uubv$3bjrg$1@dont-email.me> GB wrote:
On 28/08/2026 14:47, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Jeff, you've skipped a fairly interesting point.Then please explain why it is acceptable for Palestinians, who had >>>>>>> been living in Palestine for over 1,000 years and so "owned"
Palestine by right of occupation,
If ownership is obtained by occupying the land, how far back do you
look?
If you are short-sighted and only look back say 50 years, then the
land is 100% owned by the present occupiers.
Look back 150 years, and it's 50/50 Arab/Jewish.
Look back 1000 years, and it's 92.5% Arab/7.5% Jewish
Look back 5000 years, and it's 30% Arab/70% Jewish.
And, of course, the boundaries were different 5000 years ago, and the
whole of the West Bank was part of Israel.
So, I think this occupation argument you raised is unhelpful, because
you can get any answer you want.
I think I was clear about this, in 1947 when terrorists started to
occupy Palestine...
Can that possibly be regarded as an unbiased entry to discussion in a
spirit of enquiry?
I suggest that it cannot.
You had your mind made up long before this discussion was started.
It is an historical fact, widely reported and accepted, and it clearly affects my opinions.
Perhaps you would enlighten me as to how my mind was made up, please
don't be coy, spit it out in full so I know what I was thinking.
On 30/08/2026 08:57 AM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 30/08/2026 in message <nfh7ptF712uU1@mid.individual.net> JNugent wrote:
On 29/08/2026 10:47 PM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 29/08/2026 in message <116uubv$3bjrg$1@dont-email.me> GB wrote:
On 28/08/2026 14:47, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Jeff, you've skipped a fairly interesting point.Then please explain why it is acceptable for Palestinians, who had >>>>>>>>been living in Palestine for over 1,000 years and so "owned" >>>>>>>>Palestine by right of occupation,
If ownership is obtained by occupying the land, how far back do you >>>>>look?
If you are short-sighted and only look back say 50 years, then the >>>>>land is 100% owned by the present occupiers.
Look back 150 years, and it's 50/50 Arab/Jewish.
Look back 1000 years, and it's 92.5% Arab/7.5% Jewish
Look back 5000 years, and it's 30% Arab/70% Jewish.
And, of course, the boundaries were different 5000 years ago, and the >>>>>whole of the West Bank was part of Israel.
So, I think this occupation argument you raised is unhelpful, because >>>>>you can get any answer you want.
I think I was clear about this, in 1947 when terrorists started to >>>>occupy Palestine...
Can that possibly be regarded as an unbiased entry to discussion in a >>>spirit of enquiry?
I suggest that it cannot.
You had your mind made up long before this discussion was started.
It is an historical fact, widely reported and accepted, and it clearly >>affects my opinions.
It is a "historical fact" that Jewish people moving to Israel at the time >that the state was created were terrorists?
That's wht you said, and it immediately crosses the line from your
mythical "anti-Zionism" into plain vanilla-flavoured anti-Jewishness.
Perhaps you would enlighten me as to how my mind was made up, please
don't be coy, spit it out in full so I know what I was thinking.
You said it. It's all there above. ^
Regarding the Israeli people as "terrorists", for a start. And at the
time, they had been merely Jewish until a few days earlier (at the most).
And you claim that you are not anti-semitic.
On 29/08/2026 11:41 PM, The Todal wrote:
On 29/08/2026 19:14, JNugent wrote:
I am certainly not here to carry a flag for Israel and do not do so. I
think I indicated somewhere above (only a few lines above, in fact)
that not all of Israel's behaviour has been above reproach - in my
opinion.
Anyone who worked in an almost exclusively male environment in the
1960s would have heard directly from men - colleagues - who had done,
or knew someone who had done - their late 1940s National Service in
"Mandatory Palestine". What they said about the actions - some of them
atrocities - carried out ostensibly on behalf of the imminent Israel
and most of them against British soldiers.
And I wasn't too impressed with the Hollywood version of it in the
movie "Exodus" (c. 1960) which made terrorism look like a jolly jape.
Despite all of that, I am not going to join the ranks of the anti-
semitic. Knowing - as we all do - what happened in (mainly eastern)
Europe 1939 - 1945, I understand the modern Jewish willingness to
fight back and avoid things like:
QUOTE (from above):
1. Azzam Pasha: [ ... ] "Personally I hope the Jews do not force us
into this war because it will be a war of elimination and it will be
a dangerous massacre which history will record similarly to the
Mongol massacre or the wars of the Crusades" [and] "We will sweep
them [the Jews] into the sea."
2. Syrian president Shukri al-Quwatli: "We shall eradicate Zionism."
ENDQUOTE
I have used those only because someone quoted them above.
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
They are not fictional. Someone else posted them upthread. I have given
the URL link at least once in a previous post.
Do they inspire you
to feel protective towards Israel? Should we see Israel as an infant
state struggling to survive against predatory animals that want to tear
it to pieces?
At the time, can you think of a better way to see the situation?
Here's something more up to date.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/aug/29/nbc-news-team-attacked-west-bank
Palestinian woman and NBC News team reportedly attacked in West Bank
A Palestinian woman and an NBC News team are reported to have been
attacked and injured by masked Israeli settlers in the Israeli-occupied
West Bank on Saturday, amid worsening confrontations in the area.
I am not supporting that! How do either of those claims militate against
the fact that Israel WAS attacked by the neighbouring states as soon as
it was brought into existence?
--
The attack occurred when four members of the news team were interviewing
Aida Ahmed Abdullah and her family in the Palestinian town of Jalud,
near Nablus. Abdullah told the outlet that they had been driven out of
their home by settlers, and the team was walking down a hill toward the
house.
A car with Israeli license plates reversed up the hill toward them. At
least four men with their faces covered leapt from the vehicle, hitting
them with sticks and throwing rocks. rCLThey jumped out, beat us, then
jumped back in the car,rCY said NBC News correspondent Matt Bradley.
Bradley was hit twice in the arm and treated at a nearby clinic.
Several violent incidents in the area were reported on Saturday.
Palestinian workers were pepper-sprayed in nearby Qusra by masked
Israeli settlers.
Earlier this month, a group of settlers began blocking supplies from
entering Palestinian houses on the outskirts of the village near Nablus,
trapping residents inside and drawing strong criticism from the US
ambassador.
Terrible. Have you seen any support for it from this direction?
Netanyahu, whose government has been accused of turning a blind eye to
the settler attacks, condemned the rCLcriminal acts of violencerCY and
blamed rCLa handful of rioters who violate the law, cause enormous
injustice to the law-abiding settler public, hinder the IDF in
fulfilling its missions and harm IsraelrCOs standing in the worldrCY.
It doesn't sound as though he thinks much of it either.
On 30/08/2026 in message <nfh7ptF712uU1@mid.individual.net> JNugent wrote:
On 29/08/2026 10:47 PM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 29/08/2026 in message <116uubv$3bjrg$1@dont-email.me> GB wrote:
On 28/08/2026 14:47, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Jeff, you've skipped a fairly interesting point.Then please explain why it is acceptable for Palestinians, who had >>>>>>> been living in Palestine for over 1,000 years and so "owned"
Palestine by right of occupation,
If ownership is obtained by occupying the land, how far back do you
look?
If you are short-sighted and only look back say 50 years, then the
land is 100% owned by the present occupiers.
Look back 150 years, and it's 50/50-a Arab/Jewish.
Look back 1000 years, and it's 92.5% Arab/7.5% Jewish
Look back 5000 years, and it's 30% Arab/70% Jewish.
And, of course, the boundaries were different 5000 years ago, and the
whole of the West Bank was part of Israel.
So, I think this occupation argument you raised is unhelpful, because
you can get any answer you want.
I think I was clear about this, in 1947 when terrorists started to
occupy Palestine...
Can that possibly be regarded as an unbiased entry to discussion in a
spirit of enquiry?
I suggest that it cannot.
You had your mind made up long before this discussion was started.
It is an historical fact, widely reported and accepted, and it clearly affects my opinions.
Perhaps you would enlighten me as to how my mind was made up, please
don't be coy, spit it out in full so I know what I was thinking.
On 29/08/2026 in message <116uvju$3c284$1@dont-email.me> GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 08:54, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Are you a Nakba denier? 750,000 Palestinians were displaced and over
80 years around 200,000 have been maimed/killed.
About 850,000rCo900,000 Jews were displaced, expelled, or forced to flee
from Arab and MuslimrCamajority countries in the period following
IsraelrCOs establishment in 1948.
Why would you mention one and not the other?
There are only two possible explanations that I can see, namely woeful
ignorance about a subject you often express views, or bigotry. Of
course, you may have another explanation I have not thought of?
I come here to seek advice and clarification and have strong views about
the slaughter of Palestinians which is reported daily.
I am not a historian although some people here seem to think I am.
On 30/08/2026 08:57, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 30/08/2026 in message <nfh7ptF712uU1@mid.individual.net> JNugent wrote:
On 29/08/2026 10:47 PM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 29/08/2026 in message <116uubv$3bjrg$1@dont-email.me> GB wrote:
On 28/08/2026 14:47, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Jeff, you've skipped a fairly interesting point.Then please explain why it is acceptable for Palestinians, who had >>>>>>>>been living in Palestine for over 1,000 years and so "owned" >>>>>>>>Palestine by right of occupation,
If ownership is obtained by occupying the land, how far back do you >>>>>look?
If you are short-sighted and only look back say 50 years, then the >>>>>land is 100% owned by the present occupiers.
Look back 150 years, and it's 50/50-a Arab/Jewish.
Look back 1000 years, and it's 92.5% Arab/7.5% Jewish
Look back 5000 years, and it's 30% Arab/70% Jewish.
And, of course, the boundaries were different 5000 years ago, and the >>>>>whole of the West Bank was part of Israel.
So, I think this occupation argument you raised is unhelpful, because >>>>>you can get any answer you want.
I think I was clear about this, in 1947 when terrorists started to >>>>occupy Palestine...
Can that possibly be regarded as an unbiased entry to discussion in a >>>spirit of enquiry?
I suggest that it cannot.
You had your mind made up long before this discussion was started.
It is an historical fact, widely reported and accepted, and it clearly >>affects my opinions.
But you claim ignorance of all things historical, and in my view you are >utterly right to make that claim. So, why *on earth* are you repeating >claims about things you claim not to understand? It's utterly weird >behaviour.
Could I suggest that you do one of two things:
a) Spend the time and effort to research the subject thoroughly
b) Stop pontificating about a subject you have already claimed to know >nothing about.
On 30/08/2026 in message <nfijmbFdh61U1@mid.individual.net> JNugent wrote:
On 30/08/2026 08:57 AM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 30/08/2026 in message <nfh7ptF712uU1@mid.individual.net> JNugent >>>wrote:
On 29/08/2026 10:47 PM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 29/08/2026 in message <116uubv$3bjrg$1@dont-email.me> GB wrote:
On 28/08/2026 14:47, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Jeff, you've skipped a fairly interesting point.Then please explain why it is acceptable for Palestinians, who had >>>>>>>>>been living in Palestine for over 1,000 years and so "owned" >>>>>>>>>Palestine by right of occupation,
If ownership is obtained by occupying the land, how far back do you >>>>>>look?
If you are short-sighted and only look back say 50 years, then the >>>>>>land is 100% owned by the present occupiers.
Look back 150 years, and it's 50/50 Arab/Jewish.
Look back 1000 years, and it's 92.5% Arab/7.5% Jewish
Look back 5000 years, and it's 30% Arab/70% Jewish.
And, of course, the boundaries were different 5000 years ago, and the >>>>>>whole of the West Bank was part of Israel.
So, I think this occupation argument you raised is unhelpful, because >>>>>>you can get any answer you want.
I think I was clear about this, in 1947 when terrorists started to >>>>>occupy Palestine...
Can that possibly be regarded as an unbiased entry to discussion in a >>>>spirit of enquiry?
I suggest that it cannot.
You had your mind made up long before this discussion was started.
It is an historical fact, widely reported and accepted, and it clearly >>>affects my opinions.
It is a "historical fact" that Jewish people moving to Israel at the time >>that the state was created were terrorists?
That's wht you said, and it immediately crosses the line from your >>mythical "anti-Zionism" into plain vanilla-flavoured anti-Jewishness.
I didn't say that at all, I said something along the lines that 3 x
Israeli terrorist groups started to occupy Palestine, go and find the OP
and read it again.
On 29/08/2026 22:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 29/08/2026 in message <116uvju$3c284$1@dont-email.me> GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 08:54, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Are you a Nakba denier? 750,000 Palestinians were displaced and over 80 >>>>years around 200,000 have been maimed/killed.
About 850,000rCo900,000 Jews were displaced, expelled, or forced to flee >>>from Arab and MuslimrCamajority countries in the period following >>>IsraelrCOs establishment in 1948.
Why would you mention one and not the other?
There are only two possible explanations that I can see, namely woeful >>>ignorance about a subject you often express views, or bigotry. Of course, >>>you may have another explanation I have not thought of?
I come here to seek advice and clarification and have strong views about >>the slaughter of Palestinians which is reported daily.
I am not a historian although some people here seem to think I am.
It seems decidedly odd to raise historical points, then, as soon as you
are challenged on their accuracy, you simply claim that you are ignorant >about history.
If instead you came here to say that the Palestinians have had a really >rough deal since 1947, I think most people here would agree with you. We >could then have a sensible discussion.
One question for discussion is why, nearly 80 years after the war you have >not heard anything about, there are any Palestinians still living in
refugee camps? Of the rather larger number of Jews displaced from Arab >countries, none are living in refugee camps. So, why are the Palestinians >still in camps? The answer is obvious, of course, but will you work it out?
On 29/08/2026 22:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 08:54, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Are you a Nakba denier? 750,000 Palestinians were displaced and over
80 years around 200,000 have been maimed/killed.
About 850,000rCo900,000 Jews were displaced, expelled, or forced to
flee from Arab and MuslimrCamajority countries in the period following
IsraelrCOs establishment in 1948.
Why would you mention one and not the other?
There are only two possible explanations that I can see, namely
woeful ignorance about a subject you often express views, or bigotry.
Of course, you may have another explanation I have not thought of?
I come here to seek advice and clarification and have strong views
about the slaughter of Palestinians which is reported daily.
I am not a historian although some people here seem to think I am.
It seems decidedly odd to raise historical points, then, as soon as you
are challenged on their accuracy, you simply claim that you are ignorant about history.
If instead you came here to say that the Palestinians have had a really
rough deal since 1947, I think most people here would agree with you. We could then have a sensible discussion.
One question for discussion is why, nearly 80 years after the war you
have not heard anything about, there are any Palestinians still living
in refugee camps? Of the rather larger number of Jews displaced from
Arab countries, none are living in refugee camps. So, why are the Palestinians still in camps? The answer is obvious, of course, but will
you work it out?
On 30/08/2026 05:37 PM, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 22:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 08:54, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Are you a Nakba denier? 750,000 Palestinians were displaced and over >>>>> 80 years around 200,000 have been maimed/killed.
About 850,000rCo900,000 Jews were displaced, expelled, or forced to
flee from Arab and MuslimrCamajority countries in the period following >>>> IsraelrCOs establishment in 1948.
Why would you mention one and not the other?
There are only two possible explanations that I can see, namely
woeful ignorance about a subject you often express views, or bigotry.
Of course, you may have another explanation I have not thought of?
I come here to seek advice and clarification and have strong views
about the slaughter of Palestinians which is reported daily.
I am not a historian although some people here seem to think I am.
It seems decidedly odd to raise historical points, then, as soon as you
are challenged on their accuracy, you simply claim that you are ignorant
about history.
If instead you came here to say that the Palestinians have had a really
rough deal since 1947, I think most people here would agree with you. We
could then have a sensible discussion.
One question for discussion is why, nearly 80 years after the war you
have not heard anything about, there are any Palestinians still living
in refugee camps? Of the rather larger number of Jews displaced from
Arab countries, none are living in refugee camps. So, why are the
Palestinians still in camps? The answer is obvious, of course, but will
you work it out?
Very well said.
The normal rules of debate apply, of course.
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
On 30/08/2026 20:19, JNugent wrote:Well, there would have been the homes of the 850,000rCo900,000 Jews who
On 30/08/2026 05:37 PM, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 22:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 08:54, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Are you a Nakba denier? 750,000 Palestinians were displaced and over >>>>>> 80 years around 200,000 have been maimed/killed.
About 850,000rCo900,000 Jews were displaced, expelled, or forced to
flee from Arab and MuslimrCamajority countries in the period following >>>>> IsraelrCOs establishment in 1948.
Why would you mention one and not the other?
There are only two possible explanations that I can see, namely
woeful ignorance about a subject you often express views, or bigotry. >>>>> Of course, you may have another explanation I have not thought of?
I come here to seek advice and clarification and have strong views
about the slaughter of Palestinians which is reported daily.
I am not a historian although some people here seem to think I am.
It seems decidedly odd to raise historical points, then, as soon as you
are challenged on their accuracy, you simply claim that you are ignorant >>> about history.
If instead you came here to say that the Palestinians have had a really
rough deal since 1947, I think most people here would agree with you. We >>> could then have a sensible discussion.
One question for discussion is why, nearly 80 years after the war you
have not heard anything about, there are any Palestinians still living
in refugee camps? Of the rather larger number of Jews displaced from
Arab countries, none are living in refugee camps. So, why are the
Palestinians still in camps? The answer is obvious, of course, but will
you work it out?
Very well said.
The normal rules of debate apply, of course.
AI Overview: Palestinians live in refugee camps because they were
displaced from their homes during past conflicts and have been denied
the right to return.
Thus, the Israelis stole the land from the Palestinians and then washed their hands of the problem, saying that it was now the obligation of the neighbouring "Arab" countries to find new homes and land for those
refugees.
So that's the obvious answer, right? Right?
On 29/08/2026 23:41, The Todal wrote:
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
You deny the quotes from Pasha are real. You call them fictional. Can I
ask on what basis you came to that conclusion?
Before you answer, can I point out that they have been widely quoted,
and they can be traced back to contemporaneous sources in 19
There's even a wikipedia article named Azzam Pasha quotation.
On 31/08/2026 12:19, The Todal wrote:
On 30/08/2026 20:19, JNugent wrote:Well, there would have been the homes of the 850,000rCo900,000 Jews who
On 30/08/2026 05:37 PM, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 22:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 08:54, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Are you a Nakba denier? 750,000 Palestinians were displaced and over >>>>>>> 80 years around 200,000 have been maimed/killed.
About 850,000rCo900,000 Jews were displaced, expelled, or forced to >>>>>> flee from Arab and MuslimrCamajority countries in the period following >>>>>> IsraelrCOs establishment in 1948.
Why would you mention one and not the other?
There are only two possible explanations that I can see, namely
woeful ignorance about a subject you often express views, or bigotry. >>>>>> Of course, you may have another explanation I have not thought of?
I come here to seek advice and clarification and have strong views
about the slaughter of Palestinians which is reported daily.
I am not a historian although some people here seem to think I am.
It seems decidedly odd to raise historical points, then, as soon as you >>>> are challenged on their accuracy, you simply claim that you are
ignorant
about history.
If instead you came here to say that the Palestinians have had a really >>>> rough deal since 1947, I think most people here would agree with
you. We
could then have a sensible discussion.
One question for discussion is why, nearly 80 years after the war you
have not heard anything about, there are any Palestinians still living >>>> in refugee camps? Of the rather larger number of Jews displaced from
Arab countries, none are living in refugee camps. So, why are the
Palestinians still in camps? The answer is obvious, of course, but will >>>> you work it out?
Very well said.
The normal rules of debate apply, of course.
AI Overview: Palestinians live in refugee camps because they were
displaced from their homes during past conflicts and have been denied
the right to return.
Thus, the Israelis stole the land from the Palestinians and then
washed their hands of the problem, saying that it was now the
obligation of the neighbouring "Arab" countries to find new homes and
land for those refugees.
So that's the obvious answer, right? Right?
were displaced available. So, simple arithmetic would suggest that
there'd have been plenty of space.
The question is valid: why weren't the Palestinian Arabs resettled?
Indeed, why aren't they now? For how many generations are they to be
held in refugee camps?
I can think of several obvious reasons:
Resettlement implies recognition of IsraelrCOs permanence
The Israelis refused return
UNRWA created an openrCaended refugee system that doesn't encourage resettlement
The Palestinians hope, one day, to return
I can see that you have concentrated on just one of those.
On 29/08/2026 23:41, The Todal wrote:
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
You deny the quotes from Pasha are real. You call them fictional. Can I
ask on what basis you came to that conclusion?
Before you answer, can I point out that they have been widely quoted,
and they can be traced back to contemporaneous sources in 1947.
There's even a wikipedia article named Azzam Pasha quotation.
On 31/08/2026 13:34, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 23:41, The Todal wrote:
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
You deny the quotes from Pasha are real. You call them fictional. Can
I ask on what basis you came to that conclusion?
On the basis of JNugent's clumsily worded post which implied that the quotations were contained in a movie called Exodus.
I'm sure Exodus wasn't a documentary.
I can tell that you are fiercely protective of those quotations so I'm willing to agree that they are regarded by many as accurate quotations
from some chap called Pasha who didn't like the Jews and whose quotation gives the Israelis a comfortable and much welcome excuse for committing genocide against Palestinians on the basis that Mr Pasha's views must be shared by every man, woman, child and paramedic in Gaza.
When the Nazis confiscated Jewish land and property the obvious thing
for the Jews to do, if they had not already been shot or gassed, was to accept their fate patiently and go and make a new life in another
country.
And abandon any claim to what was once theirs.
You evidently approve of such a course of action.It doesn't matter whether anyone 'approves'. It's just a fact.
On 31 Aug 2026 at 13:34:31 BST, "GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote:
On 29/08/2026 23:41, The Todal wrote:
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
You deny the quotes from Pasha are real. You call them fictional. Can I
ask on what basis you came to that conclusion?
Before you answer, can I point out that they have been widely quoted,
and they can be traced back to contemporaneous sources in 1947.
There's even a wikipedia article named Azzam Pasha quotation.
I'm sure you can find the The Protocols of the Elders of Zion somewhere on the
Internet. "I read it on the Internet" is not normally considered proof of truth.
On 31/08/2026 12:59, GB wrote:
On 31/08/2026 12:19, The Todal wrote:
On 30/08/2026 20:19, JNugent wrote:Well, there would have been the homes of the 850,000rCo900,000 Jews who
On 30/08/2026 05:37 PM, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 22:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 08:54, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Are you a Nakba denier? 750,000 Palestinians were displaced and over >>>>>>>> 80 years around 200,000 have been maimed/killed.
About 850,000rCo900,000 Jews were displaced, expelled, or forced to >>>>>>> flee from Arab and MuslimrCamajority countries in the period following >>>>>>> IsraelrCOs establishment in 1948.I come here to seek advice and clarification and have strong views >>>>>> about the slaughter of Palestinians which is reported daily.
Why would you mention one and not the other?
There are only two possible explanations that I can see, namely
woeful ignorance about a subject you often express views, or bigotry. >>>>>>> Of course, you may have another explanation I have not thought of? >>>>>
I am not a historian although some people here seem to think I am.
It seems decidedly odd to raise historical points, then, as soon as you >>>>> are challenged on their accuracy, you simply claim that you are
ignorant
about history.
If instead you came here to say that the Palestinians have had a really >>>>> rough deal since 1947, I think most people here would agree with
you. We
could then have a sensible discussion.
One question for discussion is why, nearly 80 years after the war you >>>>> have not heard anything about, there are any Palestinians still living >>>>> in refugee camps? Of the rather larger number of Jews displaced from >>>>> Arab countries, none are living in refugee camps. So, why are the
Palestinians still in camps? The answer is obvious, of course, but will >>>>> you work it out?
Very well said.
The normal rules of debate apply, of course.
AI Overview: Palestinians live in refugee camps because they were
displaced from their homes during past conflicts and have been denied
the right to return.
Thus, the Israelis stole the land from the Palestinians and then
washed their hands of the problem, saying that it was now the
obligation of the neighbouring "Arab" countries to find new homes and
land for those refugees.
So that's the obvious answer, right? Right?
were displaced available. So, simple arithmetic would suggest that
there'd have been plenty of space.
The question is valid: why weren't the Palestinian Arabs resettled?
Indeed, why aren't they now? For how many generations are they to be
held in refugee camps?
I can think of several obvious reasons:
Resettlement implies recognition of IsraelrCOs permanence
The Israelis refused return
UNRWA created an openrCaended refugee system that doesn't encourage
resettlement
The Palestinians hope, one day, to return
I can see that you have concentrated on just one of those.
When the Nazis confiscated Jewish land and property the obvious thing
for the Jews to do, if they had not already been shot or gassed, was to accept their fate patiently and go and make a new life in another
country. And abandon any claim to what was once theirs.
You evidently approve of such a course of action.
When the Nazis confiscated Jewish land and property the obvious thing
for the Jews to do, if they had not already been shot or gassed, was to accept their fate patiently and go and make a new life in another
country. And abandon any claim to what was once theirs.
On 31/08/2026 12:59, GB wrote:
On 31/08/2026 12:19, The Todal wrote:
On 30/08/2026 20:19, JNugent wrote:Well, there would have been the homes of the 850,000rCo900,000 Jews who
On 30/08/2026 05:37 PM, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 22:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 08:54, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Are you a Nakba denier? 750,000 Palestinians were displaced and >>>>>>>> over
80 years around 200,000 have been maimed/killed.
About 850,000rCo900,000 Jews were displaced, expelled, or forced to >>>>>>> flee from Arab and MuslimrCamajority countries in the period following >>>>>>> IsraelrCOs establishment in 1948.I come here to seek advice and clarification and have strong views >>>>>> about the slaughter of Palestinians which is reported daily.
Why would you mention one and not the other?
There are only two possible explanations that I can see, namely
woeful ignorance about a subject you often express views, or
bigotry.
Of course, you may have another explanation I have not thought of? >>>>>
I am not a historian although some people here seem to think I am.
It seems decidedly odd to raise historical points, then, as soon as
you
are challenged on their accuracy, you simply claim that you are
ignorant
about history.
If instead you came here to say that the Palestinians have had a
really
rough deal since 1947, I think most people here would agree with
you. We
could then have a sensible discussion.
One question for discussion is why, nearly 80 years after the war you >>>>> have not heard anything about, there are any Palestinians still living >>>>> in refugee camps? Of the rather larger number of Jews displaced from >>>>> Arab countries, none are living in refugee camps. So, why are the
Palestinians still in camps? The answer is obvious, of course, but
will
you work it out?
Very well said.
The normal rules of debate apply, of course.
AI Overview: Palestinians live in refugee camps because they were
displaced from their homes during past conflicts and have been denied
the right to return.
Thus, the Israelis stole the land from the Palestinians and then
washed their hands of the problem, saying that it was now the
obligation of the neighbouring "Arab" countries to find new homes and
land for those refugees.
So that's the obvious answer, right? Right?
were displaced available. So, simple arithmetic would suggest that
there'd have been plenty of space.
The question is valid: why weren't the Palestinian Arabs resettled?
Indeed, why aren't they now? For how many generations are they to be
held in refugee camps?
I can think of several obvious reasons:
Resettlement implies recognition of IsraelrCOs permanence
The Israelis refused return
UNRWA created an openrCaended refugee system that doesn't encourage
resettlement
The Palestinians hope, one day, to return
I can see that you have concentrated on just one of those.
When the Nazis confiscated Jewish land and property the obvious thing
for the Jews to do, if they had not already been shot or gassed, was to accept their fate patiently and go and make a new life in another
country. And abandon any claim to what was once theirs.
You evidently approve of such a course of action.
On 31/08/2026 13:34, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 23:41, The Todal wrote:
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
You deny the quotes from Pasha are real. You call them fictional. Can
I ask on what basis you came to that conclusion?
On the basis of JNugent's clumsily worded post which implied that the quotations were contained in a movie called Exodus.
I'm sure Exodus wasn't a documentary.
I can tell that you are fiercely protective of those quotations so I'm willing to agree that they are regarded by many as accurate quotations
from some chap called Pasha who didn't like the Jews and whose quotation gives the Israelis a comfortable and much welcome excuse for committing genocide against Palestinians on the basis that Mr Pasha's views must be shared by every man, woman, child and paramedic in Gaza.
Before you answer, can I point out that they have been widely quoted,
and they can be traced back to contemporaneous sources in 19
There's even a wikipedia article named Azzam Pasha quotation.How very wonderful. Let's spread the word.
On 30/08/2026 20:19, JNugent wrote:
On 30/08/2026 05:37 PM, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 22:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 08:54, Jeff Gaines wrote:
Are you a Nakba denier? 750,000 Palestinians were displaced and over >>>>>> 80 years around 200,000 have been maimed/killed.
About 850,000rCo900,000 Jews were displaced, expelled, or forced to
flee from Arab and MuslimrCamajority countries in the period following >>>>> IsraelrCOs establishment in 1948.
Why would you mention one and not the other?
There are only two possible explanations that I can see, namely
woeful ignorance about a subject you often express views, or bigotry. >>>>> Of course, you may have another explanation I have not thought of?
I come here to seek advice and clarification and have strong views
about the slaughter of Palestinians which is reported daily.
I am not a historian although some people here seem to think I am.
It seems decidedly odd to raise historical points, then, as soon as you
are challenged on their accuracy, you simply claim that you are ignorant >>> about history.
If instead you came here to say that the Palestinians have had a really
rough deal since 1947, I think most people here would agree with you. We >>> could then have a sensible discussion.
One question for discussion is why, nearly 80 years after the war you
have not heard anything about, there are any Palestinians still living
in refugee camps? Of the rather larger number of Jews displaced from
Arab countries, none are living in refugee camps. So, why are the
Palestinians still in camps? The answer is obvious, of course, but will
you work it out?
Very well said.
The normal rules of debate apply, of course.
AI Overview: Palestinians live in refugee camps because they were
displaced from their homes during past conflicts and have been denied
the right to return.
Thus, the Israelis stole the land from the Palestinians and then washed
their hands of the problem, saying that it was now the obligation of the neighbouring "Arab" countries to find new homes and land for those
refugees.
So that's the obvious answer, right? Right?
On 31/08/2026 15:18, The Todal wrote:
On 31/08/2026 13:34, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 23:41, The Todal wrote:
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
You deny the quotes from Pasha are real. You call them fictional. Can
I ask on what basis you came to that conclusion?
On the basis of JNugent's clumsily worded post which implied that the
quotations were contained in a movie called Exodus.
I love the way that you blame JNugent for "clumsily" wording his post, rather than accepting responsibility yourself.
I'm sure Exodus wasn't a documentary.
I can tell that you are fiercely protective of those quotations so I'm
willing to agree that they are regarded by many as accurate quotations
from some chap called Pasha who didn't like the Jews and whose
quotation gives the Israelis a comfortable and much welcome excuse for
committing genocide against Palestinians on the basis that Mr Pasha's
views must be shared by every man, woman, child and paramedic in Gaza.
Azzam Pasha was Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time he made those remarks about eliminating the Jews in Palestine. Shortly after his quoted remarks, the armies of the Arab League invaded Palestine so as to carry out that elimination.
So, yes, what he said is quite important. It's not an excuse for
anything, but it certainly explains why the Jews fought so hard. They
had no choice. They were literally fighting for their lives.
On 31/08/2026 15:20, The Todal wrote:
When the Nazis confiscated Jewish land and property the obvious thing
for the Jews to do, if they had not already been shot or gassed, was
to accept their fate patiently and go and make a new life in another
country. And abandon any claim to what was once theirs.
Indeed, my parents fled Germany and made a new life in Great Britain.
So, yes, make the best of any situation you find yourself in.
My father was somewhat upset because, had he followed his career path in Germany, he'd have become a Professor of Medicine. As it was, he had to re-qualify as a doctor in England, and he ended up practising as a GP.
Did they hanker after their former lives in Germany. Not at all. At
least, they never let on to us children.
On 31/08/2026 16:45, GB wrote:
On 31/08/2026 15:20, The Todal wrote:
When the Nazis confiscated Jewish land and property the obvious thing
for the Jews to do, if they had not already been shot or gassed, was
to accept their fate patiently and go and make a new life in another
country. And abandon any claim to what was once theirs.
Indeed, my parents fled Germany and made a new life in Great Britain.
So, yes, make the best of any situation you find yourself in.
My father was somewhat upset because, had he followed his career path
in Germany, he'd have become a Professor of Medicine. As it was, he
had to re-qualify as a doctor in England, and he ended up practising
as a GP.
Did they hanker after their former lives in Germany. Not at all. At
least, they never let on to us children.
I don't suppose your father had to leave behind any expensive works ofIt's a thing called history. Throughout it, might has been right.
art, or real estate. If he had been forced to abandon such property he
might have decided not to try to recover it, but there were certainly
Jews who took a different view and I think rightly so.
It remains an unresolved scandal for many Jews whose families were dispossessed.
And there are plenty of contemporary news stories showing that the
Israeli settlers are stealing Palestinian land with the support and connivance of Israeli right wing politicians and the occasional mild
rebuke from the Israeli government when the misbehaviour attracts international criticism.
On 31/08/2026 17:10, GB wrote:
On 31/08/2026 15:18, The Todal wrote:
On 31/08/2026 13:34, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 23:41, The Todal wrote:
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
You deny the quotes from Pasha are real. You call them fictional. Can
I ask on what basis you came to that conclusion?
On the basis of JNugent's clumsily worded post which implied that the
quotations were contained in a movie called Exodus.
I love the way that you blame JNugent for "clumsily" wording his post,
rather than accepting responsibility yourself.
I am pleased to have provided you with some love in your life. I know
that is in short supply.
He cited some lines which appear to be from a movie called Exodus. I
assumed that they were fictional. Even if they were genuine quotations
from a real person, they provide no excuse for the Israeli apartheid
system that continues to this day, nor the blatant violation of
Palestinian rights.
You might say that at Rorke's Drift the British had to fight the Zulus
or be massacred. That would not provide a good excuse for continued subjugation of black people for ever after.
If bellicose statements always justified savage retaliation, Donald
Trump would be arrested and extracted from the USA by Canadian special forces.
And now they are literally conducting genocide in order to atone for the incompetence of the IDF and the Israeli government in failing to notice
I'm sure Exodus wasn't a documentary.
I can tell that you are fiercely protective of those quotations so I'm
willing to agree that they are regarded by many as accurate quotations
from some chap called Pasha who didn't like the Jews and whose
quotation gives the Israelis a comfortable and much welcome excuse for
committing genocide against Palestinians on the basis that Mr Pasha's
views must be shared by every man, woman, child and paramedic in Gaza.
Azzam Pasha was Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time he made
those remarks about eliminating the Jews in Palestine. Shortly after his
quoted remarks, the armies of the Arab League invaded Palestine so as to
carry out that elimination.
So, yes, what he said is quite important. It's not an excuse for
anything, but it certainly explains why the Jews fought so hard. They
had no choice. They were literally fighting for their lives.
and prevent an imminent attack by Hamas terrorists.
Genocide can be explained, but not justified.
Azzam Pasha was Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time he made those
remarks about eliminating the Jews in Palestine.
On 31/08/2026 17:10, GB wrote:
On 31/08/2026 15:18, The Todal wrote:
On 31/08/2026 13:34, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 23:41, The Todal wrote:
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
You deny the quotes from Pasha are real. You call them fictional.
Can I ask on what basis you came to that conclusion?
On the basis of JNugent's clumsily worded post which implied that the
quotations were contained in a movie called Exodus.
I love the way that you blame JNugent for "clumsily" wording his post,
rather than accepting responsibility yourself.
I am pleased to have provided you with some love in your life. I know
that is in short supply.
He cited some lines which appear to be from a movie called Exodus.
I
assumed that they were fictional. Even if they were genuine quotations
from a real person, they provide no excuse for the Israeli apartheid
system that continues to this day, nor the blatant violation of
Palestinian rights.
You might say that at Rorke's Drift the British had to fight the Zulus
or be massacred. That would not provide a good excuse for continued subjugation of black people for ever after.
If bellicose statements always justified savage retaliation, Donald
Trump would be arrested and extracted from the USA by Canadian special forces.
I'm sure Exodus wasn't a documentary.
I can tell that you are fiercely protective of those quotations so
I'm willing to agree that they are regarded by many as accurate
quotations from some chap called Pasha who didn't like the Jews and
whose quotation gives the Israelis a comfortable and much welcome
excuse for committing genocide against Palestinians on the basis that
Mr Pasha's views must be shared by every man, woman, child and
paramedic in Gaza.
Azzam Pasha was Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time he
made those remarks about eliminating the Jews in Palestine. Shortly
after his quoted remarks, the armies of the Arab League invaded
Palestine so as to carry out that elimination.
So, yes, what he said is quite important. It's not an excuse for
anything, but it certainly explains why the Jews fought so hard. They
had no choice. They were literally fighting for their lives.
And now they are literally conducting genocide in order to atone for the incompetence of the IDF and the Israeli government in failing to notice
and prevent an imminent attack by Hamas terrorists.
Genocide can be explained, but not justified.
On 02/09/2026 08:43 AM, The Todal wrote:
On 31/08/2026 17:10, GB wrote:
On 31/08/2026 15:18, The Todal wrote:
On 31/08/2026 13:34, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 23:41, The Todal wrote:
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
You deny the quotes from Pasha are real. You call them fictional.
Can I ask on what basis you came to that conclusion?
On the basis of JNugent's clumsily worded post which implied that the
quotations were contained in a movie called Exodus.
I love the way that you blame JNugent for "clumsily" wording his post,
rather than accepting responsibility yourself.
I am pleased to have provided you with some love in your life. I know
that is in short supply.
He cited some lines which appear to be from a movie called Exodus.
I don't remember quoting lines from the movie "Exodus".
I have only ever seen it once - over twenty years ago - and do not
remember any of the dialogue at all. However, I do remember some
incidents depicted within the film.
I
assumed that they were fictional. Even if they were genuine quotations
from a real person, they provide no excuse for the Israeli apartheid
system that continues to this day, nor the blatant violation of
Palestinian rights.
Whoah... the movie "Exodus" does not attack Jewish or Israeli people.
Quite the opposite. Even if I had remembered a quote, which I hadn't) it would and could not have been causative of what you describe as "the
Israeli apartheid system that continues to this day".
You might say that at Rorke's Drift the British had to fight the Zulus
or be massacred. That would not provide a good excuse for continued
subjugation of black people for ever after.
If bellicose statements always justified savage retaliation, Donald
Trump would be arrested and extracted from the USA by Canadian special
forces.
I'm sure Exodus wasn't a documentary.
I can tell that you are fiercely protective of those quotations so
I'm willing to agree that they are regarded by many as accurate
quotations from some chap called Pasha who didn't like the Jews and
whose quotation gives the Israelis a comfortable and much welcome
excuse for committing genocide against Palestinians on the basis that
Mr Pasha's views must be shared by every man, woman, child and
paramedic in Gaza.
And now they are literally conducting genocide in order to atone for the
incompetence of the IDF and the Israeli government in failing to notice
and prevent an imminent attack by Hamas terrorists.
Nice bit of victim blaming.
Genocide can be explained, but not justified.
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message news:1174924$12tmf$1@dont-email.me...
Azzam Pasha was Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time he made those
remarks about eliminating the Jews in Palestine.
What he was actually quoted as also saying, at least according to the link you
kindly provided yourself, was
" Personally I hope the Jews do not force us into this war because it will be a
war of elimination and it will be a serious massacre" *
And not
" Personally I hope the Jews force us into this war because it will be a war of
elimination and it will be a serious massacre"
In the hope that the Jews saw them too, before it was too late.
bb
* In 2010, the source of the quote was traced by the computer
scientist Brendan McKay to an October 11, 1947, article in the
Egyptian newspaper Akhbar al-Yom, titled "A War of Extermination",
which included the quote with the added words, "Personally, I
hope the Jews do not force us into this war, because it would
be a war of extermination and momentous massacre
...".[
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azzam_Pasha_quotation
On 02/09/2026 09:47, JNugent wrote:
On 02/09/2026 08:43 AM, The Todal wrote:
On 31/08/2026 17:10, GB wrote:
On 31/08/2026 15:18, The Todal wrote:
On 31/08/2026 13:34, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 23:41, The Todal wrote:
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
You deny the quotes from Pasha are real. You call them fictional.
Can I ask on what basis you came to that conclusion?
On the basis of JNugent's clumsily worded post which implied that the >>>>> quotations were contained in a movie called Exodus.
I love the way that you blame JNugent for "clumsily" wording his post, >>>> rather than accepting responsibility yourself.
I am pleased to have provided you with some love in your life. I know
that is in short supply.
He cited some lines which appear to be from a movie called Exodus.
I don't remember quoting lines from the movie "Exodus".
Let me help you understand why I said your post was clumsily worded.
quotes from you:
And I wasn't too impressed with the Hollywood version of it in the movie "Exodus" (c. 1960) which made terrorism look like a jolly jape.
Despite all of that, I am not going to join the ranks of the
anti-semitic. Knowing - as we all do - what happened in (mainly eastern) Europe 1939 - 1945, I understand the modern Jewish willingness to fight
back and avoid things like:
QUOTE (from above):
1. Azzam Pasha:
unquote
So when you said "quote from above" I assumed you meant from Exodus.
Fictional. Because, rather like you, I don't spend a lot of time doing research on the internet.
I am only sorry that my laborious explanation is even necessary.
I have only ever seen it once - over twenty years ago - and do not
remember any of the dialogue at all. However, I do remember some
incidents depicted within the film.
I
assumed that they were fictional. Even if they were genuine quotations
from a real person, they provide no excuse for the Israeli apartheid
system that continues to this day, nor the blatant violation of
Palestinian rights.
Whoah... the movie "Exodus" does not attack Jewish or Israeli people.
Quite the opposite. Even if I had remembered a quote, which I hadn't)
it would and could not have been causative of what you describe as
"the Israeli apartheid system that continues to this day".
I certainly haven't suggested that a movie, Exodus, has caused the
Israeli apartheid system. That would be an odd suggestion indeed.
You might say that at Rorke's Drift the British had to fight the Zulus
or be massacred. That would not provide a good excuse for continued
subjugation of black people for ever after.
If bellicose statements always justified savage retaliation, Donald
Trump would be arrested and extracted from the USA by Canadian special
forces.
I'm sure Exodus wasn't a documentary.
I can tell that you are fiercely protective of those quotations so
I'm willing to agree that they are regarded by many as accurate
quotations from some chap called Pasha who didn't like the Jews and
whose quotation gives the Israelis a comfortable and much welcome
excuse for committing genocide against Palestinians on the basis that >>>>> Mr Pasha's views must be shared by every man, woman, child and
paramedic in Gaza.
snip
And now they are literally conducting genocide in order to atone for the >>> incompetence of the IDF and the Israeli government in failing to notice
and prevent an imminent attack by Hamas terrorists.
Nice bit of victim blaming.
I think it may be time for you to do more research. For one thing, many Israelis have blamed the civilians of Gaza for the massacres perpetrated
by Hamas and have claimed that it is reasonable to bomb the civilians
because they (ie most or all of them) were seen to be rejoicing at the
Hamas action.
For another thing, it is now accepted that the Hamas breach of the
fences and attack on the kibbutzim was attributable in large part to the incompetence of the IDF at that time. This isn't just "victim blaming".
It is security-service-blaming.
You can read this, or not, as you please:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/israels-army-admits-failures-on-oct-7-and-says-it-underestimated-hamas-capabilities
On 02/09/2026 11:14 AM, The Todal wrote:
On 02/09/2026 09:47, JNugent wrote:
On 02/09/2026 08:43 AM, The Todal wrote:
On 31/08/2026 17:10, GB wrote:
On 31/08/2026 15:18, The Todal wrote:
On 31/08/2026 13:34, GB wrote:
On 29/08/2026 23:41, The Todal wrote:
I don't see the point of your fictional quotations.
You deny the quotes from Pasha are real. You call them fictional. >>>>>>> Can I ask on what basis you came to that conclusion?
On the basis of JNugent's clumsily worded post which implied that the >>>>>> quotations were contained in a movie called Exodus.
I love the way that you blame JNugent for "clumsily" wording his post, >>>>> rather than accepting responsibility yourself.
I am pleased to have provided you with some love in your life. I know
that is in short supply.
He cited some lines which appear to be from a movie called Exodus.
I don't remember quoting lines from the movie "Exodus".
Let me help you understand why I said your post was clumsily worded.
quotes from you:
And I wasn't too impressed with the Hollywood version of it in the movie
"Exodus" (c. 1960) which made terrorism look like a jolly jape.
Despite all of that, I am not going to join the ranks of the
anti-semitic. Knowing - as we all do - what happened in (mainly eastern)
Europe 1939 - 1945, I understand the modern Jewish willingness to fight
back and avoid things like:
QUOTE (from above):
1. Azzam Pasha:
unquote
So when you said "quote from above" I assumed you meant from Exodus.
But there was significantly more "above Exodus". The sources from which
I quoted, for a start.
Fictional.-a Because, rather like you, I don't spend a lot of time doingNevertheless, I quoted nothing from the movie. Had I wanted to, I
research on the internet.
couldn't have; I've only ever seen it once and that was many years ago.
I am only sorry that my laborious explanation is even necessary.
I think you HAD to explain why you thought I was quoting dialogue from a movie! :-)
But thanks for clearing it up anyway.
I have only ever seen it once - over twenty years ago - and do not
remember any of the dialogue at all. However, I do remember some
incidents depicted within the film.
I
assumed that they were fictional. Even if they were genuine quotations >>>> from a real person, they provide no excuse for the Israeli apartheid
system that continues to this day, nor the blatant violation of
Palestinian rights.
No doubt some of the movie was fictional (that always has to be the
case), but overall, it depicted real events, including the bombing of
the King David Hotel.
Whoah... the movie "Exodus" does not attack Jewish or Israeli people.
Quite the opposite. Even if I had remembered a quote, which I hadn't)
it would and could not have been causative of what you describe as
"the Israeli apartheid system that continues to this day".
I certainly haven't suggested that a movie, Exodus, has caused the
Israeli apartheid system. That would be an odd suggestion indeed.
Aah... an analogue of your misunderstanding of MY post!
So... we can all do it.
You might say that at Rorke's Drift the British had to fight the Zulus >>>> or be massacred. That would not provide a good excuse for continued
subjugation of black people for ever after.
If bellicose statements always justified savage retaliation, Donald
Trump would be arrested and extracted from the USA by Canadian special >>>> forces.
I'm sure Exodus wasn't a documentary.
I can tell that you are fiercely protective of those quotations so >>>>>> I'm willing to agree that they are regarded by many as accurate
quotations from some chap called Pasha who didn't like the Jews and >>>>>> whose quotation gives the Israelis a comfortable and much welcome
excuse for committing genocide against Palestinians on the basis that >>>>>> Mr Pasha's views must be shared by every man, woman, child and
paramedic in Gaza.
snip
And now they are literally conducting genocide in order to atone for
the
incompetence of the IDF and the Israeli government in failing to notice >>>> and prevent an imminent attack by Hamas terrorists.
Nice bit of victim blaming.
I think it may be time for you to do more research. For one thing, many
Israelis have blamed the civilians of Gaza for the massacres perpetrated
by Hamas and have claimed that it is reasonable to bomb the civilians
because they (ie most or all of them) were seen to be rejoicing at the
Hamas action.
Yes. I suppose so. They also rejoiced in the murder of 3,000+ people in
New York in 2001.
For another thing, it is now accepted that the Hamas breach of the
fences and attack on the kibbutzim was attributable in large part to the
incompetence of the IDF at that time. This isn't just "victim blaming".
It is security-service-blaming.
You can read this, or not, as you please:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/israels-army-admits-failures-on-
oct-7-and-says-it-underestimated-hamas-capabilities
You CANNOT lay the blame for rape, murder, torture and kidnapping of
Israeli citizens in Israel on the IDF. It's about as ridiculous as one
can be.
Be serious.
If you left your front door unlocked while out, would you be to blame
for the theft of all your valuables?
On 02/09/2026 15:46, JNugent wrote:
On 02/09/2026 11:14 AM, The Todal wrote:
On 02/09/2026 09:47, JNugent wrote:
On 02/09/2026 08:43 AM, The Todal wrote:
And now they are literally conducting genocide in order to atone
for the incompetence of the IDF and the Israeli government in failing >>>>> to notice and prevent an imminent attack by Hamas terrorists.
Nice bit of victim blaming.
I think it may be time for you to do more research. For one thing, many
Israelis have blamed the civilians of Gaza for the massacres perpetrated >>> by Hamas and have claimed that it is reasonable to bomb the civilians
because they (ie most or all of them) were seen to be rejoicing at the
Hamas action.
Yes. I suppose so. They also rejoiced in the murder of 3,000+ people
in New York in 2001.
For another thing, it is now accepted that the Hamas breach of the
fences and attack on the kibbutzim was attributable in large part to the >>> incompetence of the IDF at that time. This isn't just "victim blaming".
It is security-service-blaming.
You can read this, or not, as you please:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/israels-army-admits-failures-on-
oct-7-and-says-it-underestimated-hamas-capabilities
You CANNOT lay the blame for rape, murder, torture and kidnapping of
Israeli citizens in Israel on the IDF. It's about as ridiculous as one
can be.
Be serious.
If you left your front door unlocked while out, would you be to blame
for the theft of all your valuables?
Yes, of course, it is normally described as culpable negligence if they
are stolen. In much the same way IDF and Israel's security services are
to blame for 7/10.
Perhaps it was in their interests to allow the massacre to occur as justification for further ethnic cleansing?
On 02/09/2026 09:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message
news:1174924$12tmf$1@dont-email.me...
Azzam Pasha was Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time he made >>> those
remarks about eliminating the Jews in Palestine.
What he was actually quoted as also saying, at least according to the link >> you
kindly provided yourself, was
" Personally I hope the Jews do not force us into this war because it will be
a
war of elimination and it will be a serious massacre" *
And not
" Personally I hope the Jews force us into this war because it will be a war >> of
elimination and it will be a serious massacre"
Indeed, I quoted exactly the words he said in my post of 28/08/26. I agree that Abbas expressed some scruples.
However, as I also said in that post, the Jews did accept the UN resolution to
partition Palestine peacefully.
On 04/09/2026 12:57 AM, Fredxx wrote:
On 02/09/2026 15:46, JNugent wrote:
On 02/09/2026 11:14 AM, The Todal wrote:
On 02/09/2026 09:47, JNugent wrote:
On 02/09/2026 08:43 AM, The Todal wrote:
[ ... ]
And now they are literally conducting genocide in order to atone
for the incompetence of the IDF and the Israeli government in
failing to notice and prevent an imminent attack by Hamas
terrorists.
Nice bit of victim blaming.
I think it may be time for you to do more research. For one thing,
many Israelis have blamed the civilians of Gaza for the massacres
perpetrated by Hamas and have claimed that it is reasonable to
bomb the civilians because they (ie most or all of them) were seen
to be rejoicing at the Hamas action.
Yes. I suppose so. They also rejoiced in the murder of 3,000+
people in New York in 2001.
For another thing, it is now accepted that the Hamas breach of the
fences and attack on the kibbutzim was attributable in large part
to the incompetence of the IDF at that time. This isn't just
"victim blaming". It is security-service-blaming.
You can read this, or not, as you please:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/israels-army-admits-
failures-on-oct-7-and-says-it-underestimated-hamas-capabilities
You CANNOT lay the blame for rape, murder, torture and kidnapping
of Israeli citizens in Israel on the IDF. It's about as ridiculous
as one can be.
Be serious.
If you left your front door unlocked while out, would you be to
blame for the theft of all your valuables?
Yes, of course, it is normally described as culpable negligence if
they are stolen. In much the same way IDF and Israel's security
services are to blame for 7/10.
Yes - the same way. That is, no blame. The blame for theft lies with
the thief. The blame for murder lies with those committing the
murder(s).
Perhaps it was in their interests to allow the massacre to occur as
justification for further ethnic cleansing?
Do you adhere to any other conspiracy theories as well?
I state my own position: I am a NIL conspiracy theorist. But I do
have strong doubts about the JFK murder and I didn't take a position
on that until I saw the Zapruder film and visited the crime-scene.
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message news:11793hk$2p1rh$1@dont-email.me...
On 02/09/2026 09:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message
news:1174924$12tmf$1@dont-email.me...
Azzam Pasha was Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time he made >>>> those
remarks about eliminating the Jews in Palestine.
What he was actually quoted as also saying, at least according to the link >>> you
kindly provided yourself, was
" Personally I hope the Jews do not force us into this war because it will >>> be
a
war of elimination and it will be a serious massacre" *
And not
" Personally I hope the Jews force us into this war because it will be a war
of
elimination and it will be a serious massacre"
Indeed, I quoted exactly the words he said in my post of 28/08/26. I agree >> that Abbas expressed some scruples.
However, as I also said in that post, the Jews did accept the UN resolution >> to
partition Palestine peacefully.
Except they decided to jump the gun by declaring Independence first.
Thus denying the Arabs any further possibility of negotiating but
presenting the World with a fait accompli
The Arabs rejected the first majority plan as passed by the UN as
being unduly favourable to the Jews; and did and do many people
including the British Foreign Secretary Ernest Begin.
quote
For Ernest Begin, the British Foreign Secretary, the majority plan [accepted by the Jews] would only lead to an outbreak of generalised violence, * as clearly unjust to the Arabs,*
:unquote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azzam_Pasha_quotation
Whatever anyone might say of him, as an ex trade union leader Begin was well versed in weighing up negotiating positions in order to reach settlements.
If he saw it as being unacceptable to the Arabs, then it most likely was.
There are factual arguments about land areas and population as well of course.
What Pasha was talking about there, was Israel's evident determination to declare Independence thus sparking off a war.
Which his faulty intelligence, led him to believe that they, Israel would inevitably lose. Thus leading to a massacre
But which Israel's superior intelligence, led them to believe they
would inevitably win.
So there was never any real possibility of a massacre in the first
place - otherwise the Israel wouldn't have declared Independence
when they did.
As they've also won all subsequent wars.
Put simply Israel's efforts in the face of an existential threat were co-ordinated under a central command with no room for dissent; whereas
the Arabs States efforts simply weren't
bb
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message news:11793hk$2p1rh$1@dont-email.me...
On 02/09/2026 09:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message
news:1174924$12tmf$1@dont-email.me...
Azzam Pasha was Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time he made >>>> those
remarks about eliminating the Jews in Palestine.
What he was actually quoted as also saying, at least according to the link >>> you
kindly provided yourself, was
" Personally I hope the Jews do not force us into this war because it will be
a
war of elimination and it will be a serious massacre" *
And not
" Personally I hope the Jews force us into this war because it will be a war
of
elimination and it will be a serious massacre"
Indeed, I quoted exactly the words he said in my post of 28/08/26. I agree >> that Abbas expressed some scruples.
However, as I also said in that post, the Jews did accept the UN resolution to
partition Palestine peacefully.
Except they decided to jump the gun by declaring Independence first.
Thus denying the Arabs any further possibility of negotiating but
presenting the World with a fait accompli
The Arabs rejected the first majority plan as passed by the UN as
being unduly favourable to the Jews; and did and do many people
including the British Foreign Secretary Ernest Begin.
quote
For Ernest Begin, the British Foreign Secretary, the majority plan [accepted by the Jews] would only lead to an outbreak of generalised violence, * as clearly unjust to the Arabs,*
:unquote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azzam_Pasha_quotation
Whatever anyone might say of him, as an ex trade union leader Begin was well versed in weighing up negotiating positions in order to reach settlements.
If he saw it as being unacceptable to the Arabs, then it most likely was.
There are factual arguments about land areas and population as well of course.
What Pasha was talking about there, was Israel's evident determination to declare Independence thus sparking off a war.
Which his faulty intelligence, led him to believe that they, Israel would inevitably lose. Thus leading to a massacre
But which Israel's superior intelligence, led them to believe they
would inevitably win.
So there was never any real possibility of a massacre in the first
place - otherwise the Israel wouldn't have declared Independence
when they did.
As they've also won all subsequent wars.
Put simply Israel's efforts in the face of an existential threat were co-ordinated under a central command with no room for dissent; whereas
the Arabs States efforts simply weren't
bb
On 08:59 4 Sep 2026, JNugent said:
I state my own position: I am a NIL conspiracy theorist. But I do
have strong doubts about the JFK murder and I didn't take a position
on that until I saw the Zapruder film and visited the crime-scene.
I have no firm view about Kennedy's assassination but, without being prurient, I remain fascinated by the disappearance of his brain after
the autopsy.
Astonishing things do happen, often through error rather than--
conspiracy, but this seems more than an amazing error.
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message news:11793hk$2p1rh$1@dont-email.me...
On 02/09/2026 09:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message
news:1174924$12tmf$1@dont-email.me...
Azzam Pasha was Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time he made >>>> those
remarks about eliminating the Jews in Palestine.
What he was actually quoted as also saying, at least according to the link >>> you
kindly provided yourself, was
" Personally I hope the Jews do not force us into this war because it will be
a
war of elimination and it will be a serious massacre" *
And not
" Personally I hope the Jews force us into this war because it will be a war
of
elimination and it will be a serious massacre"
Indeed, I quoted exactly the words he said in my post of 28/08/26. I agree >> that Abbas expressed some scruples.
However, as I also said in that post, the Jews did accept the UN resolution to
partition Palestine peacefully.
Except they decided to jump the gun by declaring Independence first.
Thus denying the Arabs any further possibility of negotiating but
presenting the World with a fait accompli
The Arabs rejected the first majority plan as passed by the UN as
being unduly favourable to the Jews; and did and do many people
including the British Foreign Secretary Ernest Begin.
quote
For Ernest Begin, the British Foreign Secretary, the majority plan [accepted by the Jews] would only lead to an outbreak of generalised violence, * as clearly unjust to the Arabs,*
:unquote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azzam_Pasha_quotation
Whatever anyone might say of him, as an ex trade union leader Begin was well versed in weighing up negotiating positions in order to reach settlements.
If he saw it as being unacceptable to the Arabs, then it most likely was.
There are factual arguments about land areas and population as well of course.
What Pasha was talking about there, was Israel's evident determination to declare Independence thus sparking off a war.
Which his faulty intelligence, led him to believe that they, Israel would inevitably lose. Thus leading to a massacre
But which Israel's superior intelligence, led them to believe they
would inevitably win.
So there was never any real possibility of a massacre in the first
place - otherwise the Israel wouldn't have declared Independence
when they did.
Pamela <uklm@permabulator.33mail.com> wrote:
On 08:59 4 Sep 2026, JNugent said:
[rCa]
I state my own position: I am a NIL conspiracy theorist. But I do
have strong doubts about the JFK murder and I didn't take a position
on that until I saw the Zapruder film and visited the crime-scene.
I have no firm view about Kennedy's assassination but, without being
prurient, I remain fascinated by the disappearance of his brain after
the autopsy.
If you view the Zapruder film, available on You Tube, there is one frame
that shows KennedyrCOs brain as a grey cloud. ItrCOs quite probable that there
wasnrCOt much material remaining to autopsy, and the rCOdisappearancerCO was a
way of sparing the family some gruesome details.
Astonishing things do happen, often through error rather than
conspiracy, but this seems more than an amazing error.
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message news:11793hk$2p1rh$1@dont-email.me...
On 02/09/2026 09:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message
news:1174924$12tmf$1@dont-email.me...
Azzam Pasha was Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time he made >>>> those
remarks about eliminating the Jews in Palestine.
What he was actually quoted as also saying, at least according to the link >>> you
kindly provided yourself, was
" Personally I hope the Jews do not force us into this war because it will be
a
war of elimination and it will be a serious massacre" *
And not
" Personally I hope the Jews force us into this war because it will be a war
of
elimination and it will be a serious massacre"
Indeed, I quoted exactly the words he said in my post of 28/08/26. I agree >> that Abbas expressed some scruples.
However, as I also said in that post, the Jews did accept the UN resolution to
partition Palestine peacefully.
Except they decided to jump the gun by declaring Independence first.
Thus denying the Arabs any further possibility of negotiating but
presenting the World with a fait accompli
The Arabs rejected the first majority plan as passed by the UN as
being unduly favourable to the Jews; and did and do many people
including the British Foreign Secretary Ernest Begin.
quote
For Ernest Begin, the British Foreign Secretary, the majority plan [accepted by the Jews] would only lead to an outbreak of generalised violence, * as clearly unjust to the Arabs,*
:unquote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azzam_Pasha_quotation
Whatever anyone might say of him, as an ex trade union leader Begin was well versed in weighing up negotiating positions in order to reach settlements.
If he saw it as being unacceptable to the Arabs, then it most likely was.
There are factual arguments about land areas and population as well of course.
What Pasha was talking about there, was Israel's evident determination to declare Independence thus sparking off a war.
Which his faulty intelligence, led him to believe that they, Israel would inevitably lose. Thus leading to a massacre
But which Israel's superior intelligence, led them to believe they
would inevitably win.
So there was never any real possibility of a massacre in the first
place - otherwise the Israel wouldn't have declared Independence
when they did.
As they've also won all subsequent wars.
Put simply Israel's efforts in the face of an existential threat were co-ordinated under a central command with no room for dissent; whereas
the Arabs States efforts simply weren't
bb
On 04/09/2026 09:39, billy bookcase wrote:
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message
news:11793hk$2p1rh$1@dont-email.me...
On 02/09/2026 09:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message
news:1174924$12tmf$1@dont-email.me...
Azzam Pasha was Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time he made >>>>> those
remarks about eliminating the Jews in Palestine.
What he was actually quoted as also saying, at least according to the link
you
kindly provided yourself, was
" Personally I hope the Jews do not force us into this war because it will >>>> be
a
war of elimination and it will be a serious massacre" *
And not
" Personally I hope the Jews force us into this war because it will be a >>>> war
of
elimination and it will be a serious massacre"
Indeed, I quoted exactly the words he said in my post of 28/08/26. I agree >>> that Abbas expressed some scruples.
However, as I also said in that post, the Jews did accept the UN resolution >>> to
partition Palestine peacefully.
Except they decided to jump the gun by declaring Independence first.
It's interesting how people rewrite history to suit their own mindset. The British Mandate ended on 14 May 1948. Israel declared Independence the same day. The Arab League invaded a few hours later. It was all timed around the Mandate ending, of course.
Thus denying the Arabs any further possibility of negotiating but
presenting the World with a fait accompli
That's simply ridiculous. The Arab League armies were massed on the borders, waiting (politely) for the British to leave, so the massacre could start.
The Arab League had, long before, rejected the UN Resolution and decided to invade. There was no more realistic chance of negotiation.
The Arabs rejected the first majority plan as passed by the UN as
being unduly favourable to the Jews; and did and do many people
including the British Foreign Secretary Ernest Begin.
quote
For Ernest Bevin, the British Foreign Secretary, the majority plan [accepted >> by the Jews] would only lead to an outbreak of generalised violence, * as
clearly unjust to the Arabs,*
:unquote
A massacre of the Jews was going to be much better. Ethnic cleansing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azzam_Pasha_quotation
Whatever anyone might say of him, as an ex trade union leader Begin was well >> versed in weighing up negotiating positions in order to reach settlements. >> If he saw it as being unacceptable to the Arabs, then it most likely was.
There are factual arguments about land areas and population as well of
course.
What Pasha was talking about there, was Israel's evident determination to
declare Independence thus sparking off a war.
Which his faulty intelligence, led him to believe that they, Israel would
inevitably lose. Thus leading to a massacre
But which Israel's superior intelligence, led them to believe they
would inevitably win.
Ridiculous.
So there was never any real possibility of a massacre in the first
place - otherwise the Israel wouldn't have declared Independence
when they did.
You state these things as if they were true!
As they've also won all subsequent wars.
Put simply Israel's efforts in the face of an existential threat were
co-ordinated under a central command with no room for dissent; whereas
the Arabs States efforts simply weren't
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message news:117onj1$305s$1@dont-email.me...
On 04/09/2026 09:39, billy bookcase wrote:
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message
news:11793hk$2p1rh$1@dont-email.me...
On 02/09/2026 09:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message
news:1174924$12tmf$1@dont-email.me...
Azzam Pasha was Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time he made >>>>>> those
remarks about eliminating the Jews in Palestine.
What he was actually quoted as also saying, at least according to the link
you
kindly provided yourself, was
" Personally I hope the Jews do not force us into this war because it will
be
a
war of elimination and it will be a serious massacre" *
And not
" Personally I hope the Jews force us into this war because it will be a >>>>> war
of
elimination and it will be a serious massacre"
Indeed, I quoted exactly the words he said in my post of 28/08/26. I agree >>>> that Abbas expressed some scruples.
However, as I also said in that post, the Jews did accept the UN resolution
to
partition Palestine peacefully.
Except they decided to jump the gun by declaring Independence first.
It's interesting how people rewrite history to suit their own mindset. The >> British Mandate ended on 14 May 1948. Israel declared Independence the same >> day. The Arab League invaded a few hours later. It was all timed around the >> Mandate ending, of course.
Oh. right !
So as soon as the Mandate ended, that was the excuse for Israel to jump in and just grab the lot !
While the Arab League were all just supposed to stand back, and just
let them get on with it.
It all makes things so much simpler, explained that way.
Thus denying the Arabs any further possibility of negotiating but
presenting the World with a fait accompli
That's simply ridiculous. The Arab League armies were massed on the borders, >> waiting (politely) for the British to leave, so the massacre could start.
This being the massacre that Pasha "hoped" would not happen;
that the Israelis "knew" would not happen; but which Israel nevertheless
has been milking as a propaganda weapon for the last 78 years.
That "massacre".
The Arab League had, long before, rejected the UN Resolution and decided to >> invade. There was no more realistic chance of negotiation.
The Arab League was nothing more than a rag bag of made-up countries,
with made-up borders drawn by the British and French*; ruled by biddable puppets installed by the British and French; so as to fill the vacuum left
by the end of the Ottoman Empire
The Arabs rejected the first majority plan as passed by the UN as
being unduly favourable to the Jews; and did and do many people
including the British Foreign Secretary Ernest Begin.
quote
For Ernest Bevin, the British Foreign Secretary, the majority plan [accepted
by the Jews] would only lead to an outbreak of generalised violence, * as >>> clearly unjust to the Arabs,*
:unquote
A massacre of the Jews was going to be much better. Ethnic cleansing.
This being the massacre that Pasha "hoped" would not happen;
that the Israelis "knew" would not happen; but which Israel nevertheless
has been milking as a propaganda weapon for the last 78 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azzam_Pasha_quotation
Whatever anyone might say of him, as an ex trade union leader Begin was well
versed in weighing up negotiating positions in order to reach settlements. >>> If he saw it as being unacceptable to the Arabs, then it most likely was. >>>
There are factual arguments about land areas and population as well of
course.
What Pasha was talking about there, was Israel's evident determination to >>> declare Independence thus sparking off a war.
Which his faulty intelligence, led him to believe that they, Israel would >>> inevitably lose. Thus leading to a massacre
But which Israel's superior intelligence, led them to believe they
would inevitably win.
Ridiculous.
Of course they knew !
So there was never any real possibility of a massacre in the first
place - otherwise the Israel wouldn't have declared Independence
when they did.
You state these things as if they were true!
I judge these things on form; nothing else.
So far its been 3-0 to Israel
With no reason to believe that they haven't always known exactly
what they were doing,
As they've also won all subsequent wars.
Put simply Israel's efforts in the face of an existential threat were
co-ordinated under a central command with no room for dissent; whereas
the Arabs States efforts simply weren't
bb
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gertrude_Bell
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message news:117onj1$305s$1@dont-email.me...
On 04/09/2026 09:39, billy bookcase wrote:
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message
news:11793hk$2p1rh$1@dont-email.me...
On 02/09/2026 09:36, billy bookcase wrote:
"GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote in message
news:1174924$12tmf$1@dont-email.me...
Azzam Pasha was Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time he made >>>>>> those
remarks about eliminating the Jews in Palestine.
What he was actually quoted as also saying, at least according to the link
you
kindly provided yourself, was
" Personally I hope the Jews do not force us into this war because it will
be
a
war of elimination and it will be a serious massacre" *
And not
" Personally I hope the Jews force us into this war because it will be a >>>>> war
of
elimination and it will be a serious massacre"
Indeed, I quoted exactly the words he said in my post of 28/08/26. I agree >>>> that Abbas expressed some scruples.
However, as I also said in that post, the Jews did accept the UN resolution
to
partition Palestine peacefully.
Except they decided to jump the gun by declaring Independence first.
It's interesting how people rewrite history to suit their own mindset. The >> British Mandate ended on 14 May 1948. Israel declared Independence the same >> day. The Arab League invaded a few hours later. It was all timed around the >> Mandate ending, of course.
Oh. right !
So as soon as the Mandate ended, that was the excuse for Israel to jump in and just grab the lot !
While the Arab League were all just supposed to stand back, and just
let them get on with it.
It all makes things so much simpler, explained that way.
Thus denying the Arabs any further possibility of negotiating but
presenting the World with a fait accompli
That's simply ridiculous. The Arab League armies were massed on the borders, >> waiting (politely) for the British to leave, so the massacre could start.
This being the massacre that Pasha "hoped" would not happen;
that the Israelis "knew" would not happen; but which Israel nevertheless
has been milking as a propaganda weapon for the last 78 years.
That "massacre".
The Arab League had, long before, rejected the UN Resolution and decided to >> invade. There was no more realistic chance of negotiation.
The Arab League was nothing more than a rag bag of made-up countries,
with made-up borders drawn by the British and French*; ruled by biddable puppets installed by the British and French; so as to fill the vacuum left
by the end of the Ottoman Empire
The Arabs rejected the first majority plan as passed by the UN as
being unduly favourable to the Jews; and did and do many people
including the British Foreign Secretary Ernest Begin.
quote
For Ernest Bevin, the British Foreign Secretary, the majority plan [accepted
by the Jews] would only lead to an outbreak of generalised violence, * as >>> clearly unjust to the Arabs,*
:unquote
A massacre of the Jews was going to be much better. Ethnic cleansing.
This being the massacre that Pasha "hoped" would not happen;
that the Israelis "knew" would not happen; but which Israel nevertheless
has been milking as a propaganda weapon for the last 78 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azzam_Pasha_quotation
Whatever anyone might say of him, as an ex trade union leader Begin was well
versed in weighing up negotiating positions in order to reach settlements. >>> If he saw it as being unacceptable to the Arabs, then it most likely was. >>>
There are factual arguments about land areas and population as well of
course.
What Pasha was talking about there, was Israel's evident determination to >>> declare Independence thus sparking off a war.
Which his faulty intelligence, led him to believe that they, Israel would >>> inevitably lose. Thus leading to a massacre
But which Israel's superior intelligence, led them to believe they
would inevitably win.
Ridiculous.
Of course they knew !
So there was never any real possibility of a massacre in the first
place - otherwise the Israel wouldn't have declared Independence
when they did.
You state these things as if they were true!
I judge these things on form; nothing else.
So far its been 3-0 to Israel
With no reason to believe that they haven't always known exactly
what they were doing,
As they've also won all subsequent wars.
Put simply Israel's efforts in the face of an existential threat were
co-ordinated under a central command with no room for dissent; whereas
the Arabs States efforts simply weren't
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 05:06:12 |
| Calls: | 1,194 |
| Files: | 1,353 |
| D/L today: |
2 files (1,590K bytes) |
| Messages: | 291,507 |