7 Things to Consider Before Choosing Sides

[P F Tinmore]

Challenger, et al,

Agreed. But then, in almost every conflict involving Muslims and Jewish, religion becomes an element. It does not mean that the focus of the conflict was along religious lines.

True. Although you cannot ignore the effects of religion in this conflict, Zionist Hasbara likes to focus on the religious element in order to deflect from the fact that from the very start, the Zionist objective was colonisation and disposession by force, which would necessitate the extermination or expulsion of the indigenous population in order to ultimately create a state for Jewish people only.

(COMMENT)

In 1919 The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement made a few of the early intents a matter of record:

• [T]he surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine,

• The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories.

• Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.
​

The record and the very first Arab-Jewish Agreement, of the long line of agreements that were to followed, made it plain that NEITHER --- His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL (representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ), and Dr. CHAIM WEIZMANN (representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation), had any intention to take anything by force. FAISAL and WEIZANN agreed that these essential concepts were important enough to set down in writing:

• All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
​

And these concepts were set down in writing and given such consideration, by the Allied Powers at 1920 San Remo Conference, that they were amplified and included in the Mandate for Palestine. (See Articles 2, 4, and 6) If there was some "colonization agenda," THEN it was not just the Zionist involved --- but with the knowledge and active participation by the Arab Community and agreed to by the Allied Powers to which Turkey renounced all territorial rights and title; and with the understanding that "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned" (the appropriate Allied Powers). (See Article 16 of the Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne, 24 July, 1923; See Part III --- Sections VII Articles 94 thru 97 and Article 132, Treaty of Peace between the Allied Powers and Turkey Signed at Sevres 10 August 1920; and again See Article 16, The Armistice of Mudros, 30 October, 1918)

Even before the Treaty of Lausanne went into force, the first of the significant clashes called the "Bloody Passover" riot of March 1920 occurred (prompting the creation of the first version of the Haganah in June), and then the1929 Riots violence at the Wailing Wall had occurred, organized the a former enemy Ottoman Army Officer turn Islamic Mufti of Jerusalem; and the Palestinian Black Hand was founded.

It is hypothesized that Haj Amin al-Husseini was a prime mover and personality involved in the organization of the 1920 Riots, which he politically benefited from in his 1921 rise to Mufti of Jerusalem. And again, Haj Amin al-Husseini was a principle instigator behind the 1929 riots. While there are nearly always overtones in any Islamic clash, behind it all was the power, wealth, and prominent influence that came with the leadership that was behind the anti-Jewish movement.

Any time you talk about immigration and settlements --- and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonisation and disposession." And in the same vein, it was nothing that the senior Arab Leadership in the immediate post-War years, did not understand and appreciate.

It is rare to find a pro-Palestinian that does not blame all the regional ills on the Israelis. Similarly, most Israelis see the Palestinians as the dominant influence in the Regional history of 1920 to the present in rioting, murder, hijacking, piracy, bombing and general assaults on Israeli citizens. Both positions take the extreme, and both have elements of truth and disinformation in them. But at the end of the day, both side are now at the line of an unproductive line or pursuit. The region is no closer to peace today, then it was in 1920. and it is not likely to change if the leadership does not open a dialog.

Most Respectfully,
R

and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonization and dispossession."​

Are you implying that is false?

 

[Hollie]

Challenger, et al,

Agreed. But then, in almost every conflict involving Muslims and Jewish, religion becomes an element. It does not mean that the focus of the conflict was along religious lines.

True. Although you cannot ignore the effects of religion in this conflict, Zionist Hasbara likes to focus on the religious element in order to deflect from the fact that from the very start, the Zionist objective was colonisation and disposession by force, which would necessitate the extermination or expulsion of the indigenous population in order to ultimately create a state for Jewish people only.

(COMMENT)

In 1919 The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement made a few of the early intents a matter of record:

• [T]he surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine,

• The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories.

• Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.
​

The record and the very first Arab-Jewish Agreement, of the long line of agreements that were to followed, made it plain that NEITHER --- His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL (representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ), and Dr. CHAIM WEIZMANN (representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation), had any intention to take anything by force. FAISAL and WEIZANN agreed that these essential concepts were important enough to set down in writing:

• All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
​

And these concepts were set down in writing and given such consideration, by the Allied Powers at 1920 San Remo Conference, that they were amplified and included in the Mandate for Palestine. (See Articles 2, 4, and 6) If there was some "colonization agenda," THEN it was not just the Zionist involved --- but with the knowledge and active participation by the Arab Community and agreed to by the Allied Powers to which Turkey renounced all territorial rights and title; and with the understanding that "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned" (the appropriate Allied Powers). (See Article 16 of the Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne, 24 July, 1923; See Part III --- Sections VII Articles 94 thru 97 and Article 132, Treaty of Peace between the Allied Powers and Turkey Signed at Sevres 10 August 1920; and again See Article 16, The Armistice of Mudros, 30 October, 1918)

Even before the Treaty of Lausanne went into force, the first of the significant clashes called the "Bloody Passover" riot of March 1920 occurred (prompting the creation of the first version of the Haganah in June), and then the1929 Riots violence at the Wailing Wall had occurred, organized the a former enemy Ottoman Army Officer turn Islamic Mufti of Jerusalem; and the Palestinian Black Hand was founded.

It is hypothesized that Haj Amin al-Husseini was a prime mover and personality involved in the organization of the 1920 Riots, which he politically benefited from in his 1921 rise to Mufti of Jerusalem. And again, Haj Amin al-Husseini was a principle instigator behind the 1929 riots. While there are nearly always overtones in any Islamic clash, behind it all was the power, wealth, and prominent influence that came with the leadership that was behind the anti-Jewish movement.

Any time you talk about immigration and settlements --- and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonisation and disposession." And in the same vein, it was nothing that the senior Arab Leadership in the immediate post-War years, did not understand and appreciate.

It is rare to find a pro-Palestinian that does not blame all the regional ills on the Israelis. Similarly, most Israelis see the Palestinians as the dominant influence in the Regional history of 1920 to the present in rioting, murder, hijacking, piracy, bombing and general assaults on Israeli citizens. Both positions take the extreme, and both have elements of truth and disinformation in them. But at the end of the day, both side are now at the line of an unproductive line or pursuit. The region is no closer to peace today, then it was in 1920. and it is not likely to change if the leadership does not open a dialog.

Most Respectfully,
R

Was either Faisal or Weizmann Palestinian?

There is no such thing as "Pal'istanian" as a national identity. That attempted fraud was perpetrated by Arafat in the late 1960's.

 

[Hollie]

Challenger, et al,

Agreed. But then, in almost every conflict involving Muslims and Jewish, religion becomes an element. It does not mean that the focus of the conflict was along religious lines.

True. Although you cannot ignore the effects of religion in this conflict, Zionist Hasbara likes to focus on the religious element in order to deflect from the fact that from the very start, the Zionist objective was colonisation and disposession by force, which would necessitate the extermination or expulsion of the indigenous population in order to ultimately create a state for Jewish people only.

(COMMENT)

In 1919 The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement made a few of the early intents a matter of record:

• [T]he surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine,

• The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories.

• Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.
​

The record and the very first Arab-Jewish Agreement, of the long line of agreements that were to followed, made it plain that NEITHER --- His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL (representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ), and Dr. CHAIM WEIZMANN (representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation), had any intention to take anything by force. FAISAL and WEIZANN agreed that these essential concepts were important enough to set down in writing:

• All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
​

And these concepts were set down in writing and given such consideration, by the Allied Powers at 1920 San Remo Conference, that they were amplified and included in the Mandate for Palestine. (See Articles 2, 4, and 6) If there was some "colonization agenda," THEN it was not just the Zionist involved --- but with the knowledge and active participation by the Arab Community and agreed to by the Allied Powers to which Turkey renounced all territorial rights and title; and with the understanding that "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned" (the appropriate Allied Powers). (See Article 16 of the Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne, 24 July, 1923; See Part III --- Sections VII Articles 94 thru 97 and Article 132, Treaty of Peace between the Allied Powers and Turkey Signed at Sevres 10 August 1920; and again See Article 16, The Armistice of Mudros, 30 October, 1918)

Even before the Treaty of Lausanne went into force, the first of the significant clashes called the "Bloody Passover" riot of March 1920 occurred (prompting the creation of the first version of the Haganah in June), and then the1929 Riots violence at the Wailing Wall had occurred, organized the a former enemy Ottoman Army Officer turn Islamic Mufti of Jerusalem; and the Palestinian Black Hand was founded.

It is hypothesized that Haj Amin al-Husseini was a prime mover and personality involved in the organization of the 1920 Riots, which he politically benefited from in his 1921 rise to Mufti of Jerusalem. And again, Haj Amin al-Husseini was a principle instigator behind the 1929 riots. While there are nearly always overtones in any Islamic clash, behind it all was the power, wealth, and prominent influence that came with the leadership that was behind the anti-Jewish movement.

Any time you talk about immigration and settlements --- and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonisation and disposession." And in the same vein, it was nothing that the senior Arab Leadership in the immediate post-War years, did not understand and appreciate.

It is rare to find a pro-Palestinian that does not blame all the regional ills on the Israelis. Similarly, most Israelis see the Palestinians as the dominant influence in the Regional history of 1920 to the present in rioting, murder, hijacking, piracy, bombing and general assaults on Israeli citizens. Both positions take the extreme, and both have elements of truth and disinformation in them. But at the end of the day, both side are now at the line of an unproductive line or pursuit. The region is no closer to peace today, then it was in 1920. and it is not likely to change if the leadership does not open a dialog.

Most Respectfully,
R

and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonization and dispossession."​

Are you implying that is false?

Colonization and dispossession is a tactic understood and employed by islamists. It speaks clearly to islamist history of war and rapine used to spread their fascist ideology.

 

[Phoenall]

Challenger, et al,

Agreed. But then, in almost every conflict involving Muslims and Jewish, religion becomes an element. It does not mean that the focus of the conflict was along religious lines.

True. Although you cannot ignore the effects of religion in this conflict, Zionist Hasbara likes to focus on the religious element in order to deflect from the fact that from the very start, the Zionist objective was colonisation and disposession by force, which would necessitate the extermination or expulsion of the indigenous population in order to ultimately create a state for Jewish people only.

(COMMENT)

In 1919 The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement made a few of the early intents a matter of record:

• [T]he surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine,

• The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories.

• Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.
​

The record and the very first Arab-Jewish Agreement, of the long line of agreements that were to followed, made it plain that NEITHER --- His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL (representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ), and Dr. CHAIM WEIZMANN (representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation), had any intention to take anything by force. FAISAL and WEIZANN agreed that these essential concepts were important enough to set down in writing:

• All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
​

And these concepts were set down in writing and given such consideration, by the Allied Powers at 1920 San Remo Conference, that they were amplified and included in the Mandate for Palestine. (See Articles 2, 4, and 6) If there was some "colonization agenda," THEN it was not just the Zionist involved --- but with the knowledge and active participation by the Arab Community and agreed to by the Allied Powers to which Turkey renounced all territorial rights and title; and with the understanding that "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned" (the appropriate Allied Powers). (See Article 16 of the Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne, 24 July, 1923; See Part III --- Sections VII Articles 94 thru 97 and Article 132, Treaty of Peace between the Allied Powers and Turkey Signed at Sevres 10 August 1920; and again See Article 16, The Armistice of Mudros, 30 October, 1918)

Even before the Treaty of Lausanne went into force, the first of the significant clashes called the "Bloody Passover" riot of March 1920 occurred (prompting the creation of the first version of the Haganah in June), and then the1929 Riots violence at the Wailing Wall had occurred, organized the a former enemy Ottoman Army Officer turn Islamic Mufti of Jerusalem; and the Palestinian Black Hand was founded.

It is hypothesized that Haj Amin al-Husseini was a prime mover and personality involved in the organization of the 1920 Riots, which he politically benefited from in his 1921 rise to Mufti of Jerusalem. And again, Haj Amin al-Husseini was a principle instigator behind the 1929 riots. While there are nearly always overtones in any Islamic clash, behind it all was the power, wealth, and prominent influence that came with the leadership that was behind the anti-Jewish movement.

Any time you talk about immigration and settlements --- and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonisation and disposession." And in the same vein, it was nothing that the senior Arab Leadership in the immediate post-War years, did not understand and appreciate.

It is rare to find a pro-Palestinian that does not blame all the regional ills on the Israelis. Similarly, most Israelis see the Palestinians as the dominant influence in the Regional history of 1920 to the present in rioting, murder, hijacking, piracy, bombing and general assaults on Israeli citizens. Both positions take the extreme, and both have elements of truth and disinformation in them. But at the end of the day, both side are now at the line of an unproductive line or pursuit. The region is no closer to peace today, then it was in 1920. and it is not likely to change if the leadership does not open a dialog.

Most Respectfully,
R

Was either Faisal or Weizmann Palestinian?

Are any of the arab muslims Palestinian in reality, or are they just using the term as a means of credibility ?

In other words does it matter when all of Palestine's leaders have been anything but Palestinian.

 

[Phoenall]

Challenger, et al,

Agreed. But then, in almost every conflict involving Muslims and Jewish, religion becomes an element. It does not mean that the focus of the conflict was along religious lines.

True. Although you cannot ignore the effects of religion in this conflict, Zionist Hasbara likes to focus on the religious element in order to deflect from the fact that from the very start, the Zionist objective was colonisation and disposession by force, which would necessitate the extermination or expulsion of the indigenous population in order to ultimately create a state for Jewish people only.

(COMMENT)

In 1919 The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement made a few of the early intents a matter of record:

• [T]he surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine,

• The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories.

• Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.
​

The record and the very first Arab-Jewish Agreement, of the long line of agreements that were to followed, made it plain that NEITHER --- His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL (representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ), and Dr. CHAIM WEIZMANN (representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation), had any intention to take anything by force. FAISAL and WEIZANN agreed that these essential concepts were important enough to set down in writing:

• All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
​

And these concepts were set down in writing and given such consideration, by the Allied Powers at 1920 San Remo Conference, that they were amplified and included in the Mandate for Palestine. (See Articles 2, 4, and 6) If there was some "colonization agenda," THEN it was not just the Zionist involved --- but with the knowledge and active participation by the Arab Community and agreed to by the Allied Powers to which Turkey renounced all territorial rights and title; and with the understanding that "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned" (the appropriate Allied Powers). (See Article 16 of the Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne, 24 July, 1923; See Part III --- Sections VII Articles 94 thru 97 and Article 132, Treaty of Peace between the Allied Powers and Turkey Signed at Sevres 10 August 1920; and again See Article 16, The Armistice of Mudros, 30 October, 1918)

Even before the Treaty of Lausanne went into force, the first of the significant clashes called the "Bloody Passover" riot of March 1920 occurred (prompting the creation of the first version of the Haganah in June), and then the1929 Riots violence at the Wailing Wall had occurred, organized the a former enemy Ottoman Army Officer turn Islamic Mufti of Jerusalem; and the Palestinian Black Hand was founded.

It is hypothesized that Haj Amin al-Husseini was a prime mover and personality involved in the organization of the 1920 Riots, which he politically benefited from in his 1921 rise to Mufti of Jerusalem. And again, Haj Amin al-Husseini was a principle instigator behind the 1929 riots. While there are nearly always overtones in any Islamic clash, behind it all was the power, wealth, and prominent influence that came with the leadership that was behind the anti-Jewish movement.

Any time you talk about immigration and settlements --- and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonisation and disposession." And in the same vein, it was nothing that the senior Arab Leadership in the immediate post-War years, did not understand and appreciate.

It is rare to find a pro-Palestinian that does not blame all the regional ills on the Israelis. Similarly, most Israelis see the Palestinians as the dominant influence in the Regional history of 1920 to the present in rioting, murder, hijacking, piracy, bombing and general assaults on Israeli citizens. Both positions take the extreme, and both have elements of truth and disinformation in them. But at the end of the day, both side are now at the line of an unproductive line or pursuit. The region is no closer to peace today, then it was in 1920. and it is not likely to change if the leadership does not open a dialog.

Most Respectfully,
R

and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonization and dispossession."​

Are you implying that is false?

YES as it is just islamonazi propaganda and lies based on one persons views, unlike the views of the majority of arab muslims that Israel will be destroyed and the Jews wiped out

 

[P F Tinmore]

Challenger, et al,

Agreed. But then, in almost every conflict involving Muslims and Jewish, religion becomes an element. It does not mean that the focus of the conflict was along religious lines.

True. Although you cannot ignore the effects of religion in this conflict, Zionist Hasbara likes to focus on the religious element in order to deflect from the fact that from the very start, the Zionist objective was colonisation and disposession by force, which would necessitate the extermination or expulsion of the indigenous population in order to ultimately create a state for Jewish people only.

(COMMENT)

In 1919 The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement made a few of the early intents a matter of record:

• [T]he surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine,

• The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories.

• Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.
​

The record and the very first Arab-Jewish Agreement, of the long line of agreements that were to followed, made it plain that NEITHER --- His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL (representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ), and Dr. CHAIM WEIZMANN (representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation), had any intention to take anything by force. FAISAL and WEIZANN agreed that these essential concepts were important enough to set down in writing:

• All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
​

And these concepts were set down in writing and given such consideration, by the Allied Powers at 1920 San Remo Conference, that they were amplified and included in the Mandate for Palestine. (See Articles 2, 4, and 6) If there was some "colonization agenda," THEN it was not just the Zionist involved --- but with the knowledge and active participation by the Arab Community and agreed to by the Allied Powers to which Turkey renounced all territorial rights and title; and with the understanding that "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned" (the appropriate Allied Powers). (See Article 16 of the Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne, 24 July, 1923; See Part III --- Sections VII Articles 94 thru 97 and Article 132, Treaty of Peace between the Allied Powers and Turkey Signed at Sevres 10 August 1920; and again See Article 16, The Armistice of Mudros, 30 October, 1918)

Even before the Treaty of Lausanne went into force, the first of the significant clashes called the "Bloody Passover" riot of March 1920 occurred (prompting the creation of the first version of the Haganah in June), and then the1929 Riots violence at the Wailing Wall had occurred, organized the a former enemy Ottoman Army Officer turn Islamic Mufti of Jerusalem; and the Palestinian Black Hand was founded.

It is hypothesized that Haj Amin al-Husseini was a prime mover and personality involved in the organization of the 1920 Riots, which he politically benefited from in his 1921 rise to Mufti of Jerusalem. And again, Haj Amin al-Husseini was a principle instigator behind the 1929 riots. While there are nearly always overtones in any Islamic clash, behind it all was the power, wealth, and prominent influence that came with the leadership that was behind the anti-Jewish movement.

Any time you talk about immigration and settlements --- and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonisation and disposession." And in the same vein, it was nothing that the senior Arab Leadership in the immediate post-War years, did not understand and appreciate.

It is rare to find a pro-Palestinian that does not blame all the regional ills on the Israelis. Similarly, most Israelis see the Palestinians as the dominant influence in the Regional history of 1920 to the present in rioting, murder, hijacking, piracy, bombing and general assaults on Israeli citizens. Both positions take the extreme, and both have elements of truth and disinformation in them. But at the end of the day, both side are now at the line of an unproductive line or pursuit. The region is no closer to peace today, then it was in 1920. and it is not likely to change if the leadership does not open a dialog.

Most Respectfully,
R

and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonization and dispossession."​

Are you implying that is false?

YES as it is just islamonazi propaganda and lies based on one persons views, unlike the views of the majority of arab muslims that Israel will be destroyed and the Jews wiped out

What does this have to do with my post?

 

[Phoenall]

Challenger, et al,

Agreed. But then, in almost every conflict involving Muslims and Jewish, religion becomes an element. It does not mean that the focus of the conflict was along religious lines.

True. Although you cannot ignore the effects of religion in this conflict, Zionist Hasbara likes to focus on the religious element in order to deflect from the fact that from the very start, the Zionist objective was colonisation and disposession by force, which would necessitate the extermination or expulsion of the indigenous population in order to ultimately create a state for Jewish people only.

(COMMENT)

In 1919 The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement made a few of the early intents a matter of record:

• [T]he surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine,

• The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories.

• Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.
​

The record and the very first Arab-Jewish Agreement, of the long line of agreements that were to followed, made it plain that NEITHER --- His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL (representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ), and Dr. CHAIM WEIZMANN (representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation), had any intention to take anything by force. FAISAL and WEIZANN agreed that these essential concepts were important enough to set down in writing:

• All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
​

And these concepts were set down in writing and given such consideration, by the Allied Powers at 1920 San Remo Conference, that they were amplified and included in the Mandate for Palestine. (See Articles 2, 4, and 6) If there was some "colonization agenda," THEN it was not just the Zionist involved --- but with the knowledge and active participation by the Arab Community and agreed to by the Allied Powers to which Turkey renounced all territorial rights and title; and with the understanding that "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned" (the appropriate Allied Powers). (See Article 16 of the Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne, 24 July, 1923; See Part III --- Sections VII Articles 94 thru 97 and Article 132, Treaty of Peace between the Allied Powers and Turkey Signed at Sevres 10 August 1920; and again See Article 16, The Armistice of Mudros, 30 October, 1918)

Even before the Treaty of Lausanne went into force, the first of the significant clashes called the "Bloody Passover" riot of March 1920 occurred (prompting the creation of the first version of the Haganah in June), and then the1929 Riots violence at the Wailing Wall had occurred, organized the a former enemy Ottoman Army Officer turn Islamic Mufti of Jerusalem; and the Palestinian Black Hand was founded.

It is hypothesized that Haj Amin al-Husseini was a prime mover and personality involved in the organization of the 1920 Riots, which he politically benefited from in his 1921 rise to Mufti of Jerusalem. And again, Haj Amin al-Husseini was a principle instigator behind the 1929 riots. While there are nearly always overtones in any Islamic clash, behind it all was the power, wealth, and prominent influence that came with the leadership that was behind the anti-Jewish movement.

Any time you talk about immigration and settlements --- and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonisation and disposession." And in the same vein, it was nothing that the senior Arab Leadership in the immediate post-War years, did not understand and appreciate.

It is rare to find a pro-Palestinian that does not blame all the regional ills on the Israelis. Similarly, most Israelis see the Palestinians as the dominant influence in the Regional history of 1920 to the present in rioting, murder, hijacking, piracy, bombing and general assaults on Israeli citizens. Both positions take the extreme, and both have elements of truth and disinformation in them. But at the end of the day, both side are now at the line of an unproductive line or pursuit. The region is no closer to peace today, then it was in 1920. and it is not likely to change if the leadership does not open a dialog.

Most Respectfully,
R

and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonization and dispossession."​

Are you implying that is false?

YES as it is just islamonazi propaganda and lies based on one persons views, unlike the views of the majority of arab muslims that Israel will be destroyed and the Jews wiped out

What does this have to do with my post?

It answered it in a manner you did not like, showing that you are biased and a Jew hater. The facts are one person said that speaking for himself, he was not speaking for the whole of Judaism. When muslims call for murder and land grabs they are speaking for all muslims.

 

[docmauser1]

and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonization and dispossession."​

Are you implying that is false?

Of course, not! It's a well-known arab occupation.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Obviously NO! ----

Was either Faisal or Weizmann Palestinian?

(COMMENT)

But there again, neither Faisal or Weizmann where officers of Opposition Forces to the Allied Powers in WWI and WWII.

The Arab League was born on 22 March 1945, and the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) were not exclusively "Palestinian" either. The AHC was the Principle organ of the Arab community of territroy under the Mandate for Palestine. The AHC was not established on UNTIL April 1936, by Haj Amin al-Husayni, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, a former Ottoman Combat Arms Officer, and instigator of the 1929 Riots. There was no Palestine organization, or a cooperative leader in the Arab community in the region of Palestine. Even the AHC turned out to be belligerent.

In fact, in 1919, when HRH Prince Faisal and Chairman Weizmann made the agreement, the designation of Palestine was not yet defined. Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, was not fully delineated until the Franco-British Boundary Commission concluded its survey and the Paulet-Newcombe Line was adopted in 1923. Three attempts between 1920 and 1923, were made to establish an institution for the Arab population of Palestine similar to the Jewish Agency; but to no avail. AND, it was not until the Treaty of Alliance between the UK and Trans-Jordan (AKA: Treaty of London, 22 March 1946), that the sovereignty and independence of the Arab State of Transjordan, to be known as the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, which establish was was to become the formal Eastern boundary of the territory subject to the Mandate of Palestine; but excluding Trans-Jordan. (The exceptions and clarification being: 1) Between 1928 and 1946, a series of successive British-Transjordanian treaties gradually led to full independence for Transjordan in 1946. 2) The Jordan - Saudi Arabia Boundary which was re-delimited as a result of a bilateral agreement signed on August 10, 1965.)

Sorry, you can't use that as a legitimate argument. The foremost respected and prominent Arab Leader of the Region was HRH Prince Faisal. And even those that were indigenous regional Arabs, did not want to establish self-governing institutions.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

"P F Tinmore, et al,

I'm saying that the simplistic view is naive and with political blinders.

Challenger, et al,

Agreed. But then, in almost every conflict involving Muslims and Jewish, religion becomes an element. It does not mean that the focus of the conflict was along religious lines.

True. Although you cannot ignore the effects of religion in this conflict, Zionist Hasbara likes to focus on the religious element in order to deflect from the fact that from the very start, the Zionist objective was colonisation and disposession by force, which would necessitate the extermination or expulsion of the indigenous population in order to ultimately create a state for Jewish people only.

(COMMENT)

In 1919 The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement made a few of the early intents a matter of record:

• [T]he surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine,

• The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories.

• Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.
​

The record and the very first Arab-Jewish Agreement, of the long line of agreements that were to followed, made it plain that NEITHER --- His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL (representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ), and Dr. CHAIM WEIZMANN (representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation), had any intention to take anything by force. FAISAL and WEIZANN agreed that these essential concepts were important enough to set down in writing:

• All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
​

And these concepts were set down in writing and given such consideration, by the Allied Powers at 1920 San Remo Conference, that they were amplified and included in the Mandate for Palestine. (See Articles 2, 4, and 6) If there was some "colonization agenda," THEN it was not just the Zionist involved --- but with the knowledge and active participation by the Arab Community and agreed to by the Allied Powers to which Turkey renounced all territorial rights and title; and with the understanding that "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned" (the appropriate Allied Powers). (See Article 16 of the Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne, 24 July, 1923; See Part III --- Sections VII Articles 94 thru 97 and Article 132, Treaty of Peace between the Allied Powers and Turkey Signed at Sevres 10 August 1920; and again See Article 16, The Armistice of Mudros, 30 October, 1918)

Even before the Treaty of Lausanne went into force, the first of the significant clashes called the "Bloody Passover" riot of March 1920 occurred (prompting the creation of the first version of the Haganah in June), and then the1929 Riots violence at the Wailing Wall had occurred, organized the a former enemy Ottoman Army Officer turn Islamic Mufti of Jerusalem; and the Palestinian Black Hand was founded.

It is hypothesized that Haj Amin al-Husseini was a prime mover and personality involved in the organization of the 1920 Riots, which he politically benefited from in his 1921 rise to Mufti of Jerusalem. And again, Haj Amin al-Husseini was a principle instigator behind the 1929 riots. While there are nearly always overtones in any Islamic clash, behind it all was the power, wealth, and prominent influence that came with the leadership that was behind the anti-Jewish movement.

Any time you talk about immigration and settlements --- and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonisation and disposession." And in the same vein, it was nothing that the senior Arab Leadership in the immediate post-War years, did not understand and appreciate.

It is rare to find a pro-Palestinian that does not blame all the regional ills on the Israelis. Similarly, most Israelis see the Palestinians as the dominant influence in the Regional history of 1920 to the present in rioting, murder, hijacking, piracy, bombing and general assaults on Israeli citizens. Both positions take the extreme, and both have elements of truth and disinformation in them. But at the end of the day, both side are now at the line of an unproductive line or pursuit. The region is no closer to peace today, then it was in 1920. and it is not likely to change if the leadership does not open a dialog.

Most Respectfully,
R

and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonization and dispossession."​

Are you implying that is false?

(COMMENT)

HRH Prince Faisal agreed to "large Scale" --- Jewish Immigration "as quickly as possible." In 1919, the was no delineation as to what constituted "Palestine." Further, there were no "Palestinian Leaders" that wanted to participate in the consultation on all matters relating to immigration; belligerently declining that opportunity 3 times.

HRH Prince Faisal was the Arab authority of the day, in that time and place. Say what you want, but the Immigration (not colonization) proceeded in accordance the agreement, and without any Palestinian objection.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

"P F Tinmore, et al,

I'm saying that the simplistic view is naive and with political blinders.

Challenger, et al,

Agreed. But then, in almost every conflict involving Muslims and Jewish, religion becomes an element. It does not mean that the focus of the conflict was along religious lines.

True. Although you cannot ignore the effects of religion in this conflict, Zionist Hasbara likes to focus on the religious element in order to deflect from the fact that from the very start, the Zionist objective was colonisation and disposession by force, which would necessitate the extermination or expulsion of the indigenous population in order to ultimately create a state for Jewish people only.

(COMMENT)

In 1919 The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement made a few of the early intents a matter of record:

• [T]he surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine,

• The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories.

• Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.
​

The record and the very first Arab-Jewish Agreement, of the long line of agreements that were to followed, made it plain that NEITHER --- His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL (representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ), and Dr. CHAIM WEIZMANN (representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation), had any intention to take anything by force. FAISAL and WEIZANN agreed that these essential concepts were important enough to set down in writing:

• All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
​

And these concepts were set down in writing and given such consideration, by the Allied Powers at 1920 San Remo Conference, that they were amplified and included in the Mandate for Palestine. (See Articles 2, 4, and 6) If there was some "colonization agenda," THEN it was not just the Zionist involved --- but with the knowledge and active participation by the Arab Community and agreed to by the Allied Powers to which Turkey renounced all territorial rights and title; and with the understanding that "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned" (the appropriate Allied Powers). (See Article 16 of the Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne, 24 July, 1923; See Part III --- Sections VII Articles 94 thru 97 and Article 132, Treaty of Peace between the Allied Powers and Turkey Signed at Sevres 10 August 1920; and again See Article 16, The Armistice of Mudros, 30 October, 1918)

Even before the Treaty of Lausanne went into force, the first of the significant clashes called the "Bloody Passover" riot of March 1920 occurred (prompting the creation of the first version of the Haganah in June), and then the1929 Riots violence at the Wailing Wall had occurred, organized the a former enemy Ottoman Army Officer turn Islamic Mufti of Jerusalem; and the Palestinian Black Hand was founded.

It is hypothesized that Haj Amin al-Husseini was a prime mover and personality involved in the organization of the 1920 Riots, which he politically benefited from in his 1921 rise to Mufti of Jerusalem. And again, Haj Amin al-Husseini was a principle instigator behind the 1929 riots. While there are nearly always overtones in any Islamic clash, behind it all was the power, wealth, and prominent influence that came with the leadership that was behind the anti-Jewish movement.

Any time you talk about immigration and settlements --- and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonisation and disposession." And in the same vein, it was nothing that the senior Arab Leadership in the immediate post-War years, did not understand and appreciate.

It is rare to find a pro-Palestinian that does not blame all the regional ills on the Israelis. Similarly, most Israelis see the Palestinians as the dominant influence in the Regional history of 1920 to the present in rioting, murder, hijacking, piracy, bombing and general assaults on Israeli citizens. Both positions take the extreme, and both have elements of truth and disinformation in them. But at the end of the day, both side are now at the line of an unproductive line or pursuit. The region is no closer to peace today, then it was in 1920. and it is not likely to change if the leadership does not open a dialog.

Most Respectfully,
R

and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonization and dispossession."​

Are you implying that is false?

(COMMENT)

HRH Prince Faisal agreed to "large Scale" --- Jewish Immigration "as quickly as possible." In 1919, the was no delineation as to what constituted "Palestine." Further, there were no "Palestinian Leaders" that wanted to participate in the consultation on all matters relating to immigration; belligerently declining that opportunity 3 times.

HRH Prince Faisal was the Arab authority of the day, in that time and place. Say what you want, but the Immigration (not colonization) proceeded in accordance the agreement, and without any Palestinian objection.

Most Respectfully,
R

Say what you want, but the Immigration (not colonization) proceeded in accordance the agreement, and without any Palestinian objection.​

Are you shittin' me. You didn't really just say that, did you.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Obviously NO! ----

Was either Faisal or Weizmann Palestinian?

(COMMENT)

But there again, neither Faisal or Weizmann where officers of Opposition Forces to the Allied Powers in WWI and WWII.

The Arab League was born on 22 March 1945, and the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) were not exclusively "Palestinian" either. The AHC was the Principle organ of the Arab community of territroy under the Mandate for Palestine. The AHC was not established on UNTIL April 1936, by Haj Amin al-Husayni, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, a former Ottoman Combat Arms Officer, and instigator of the 1929 Riots. There was no Palestine organization, or a cooperative leader in the Arab community in the region of Palestine. Even the AHC turned out to be belligerent.

In fact, in 1919, when HRH Prince Faisal and Chairman Weizmann made the agreement, the designation of Palestine was not yet defined. Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, was not fully delineated until the Franco-British Boundary Commission concluded its survey and the Paulet-Newcombe Line was adopted in 1923. Three attempts between 1920 and 1923, were made to establish an institution for the Arab population of Palestine similar to the Jewish Agency; but to no avail. AND, it was not until the Treaty of Alliance between the UK and Trans-Jordan (AKA: Treaty of London, 22 March 1946), that the sovereignty and independence of the Arab State of Transjordan, to be known as the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, which establish was was to become the formal Eastern boundary of the territory subject to the Mandate of Palestine; but excluding Trans-Jordan. (The exceptions and clarification being: 1) Between 1928 and 1946, a series of successive British-Transjordanian treaties gradually led to full independence for Transjordan in 1946. 2) The Jordan - Saudi Arabia Boundary which was re-delimited as a result of a bilateral agreement signed on August 10, 1965.)

Sorry, you can't use that as a legitimate argument. The foremost respected and prominent Arab Leader of the Region was HRH Prince Faisal. And even those that were indigenous regional Arabs, did not want to establish self-governing institutions.

Most Respectfully,
R

Three attempts between 1920 and 1923, were made to establish an institution for the Arab population of Palestine similar to the Jewish Agency; but to no avail.​

Why would they want an organization that would be the little sister of an organization they viewed as foreign and illegitimate? That would just add legitimacy to that foreign organization.

 

[docmauser1]

"P F Tinmore, et al,

I'm saying that the simplistic view is naive and with political blinders.

Challenger, et al,

Agreed. But then, in almost every conflict involving Muslims and Jewish, religion becomes an element. It does not mean that the focus of the conflict was along religious lines.

True. Although you cannot ignore the effects of religion in this conflict, Zionist Hasbara likes to focus on the religious element in order to deflect from the fact that from the very start, the Zionist objective was colonisation and disposession by force, which would necessitate the extermination or expulsion of the indigenous population in order to ultimately create a state for Jewish people only.

(COMMENT)

In 1919 The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement made a few of the early intents a matter of record:

• [T]he surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine,

• The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories.

• Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.
​

The record and the very first Arab-Jewish Agreement, of the long line of agreements that were to followed, made it plain that NEITHER --- His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL (representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ), and Dr. CHAIM WEIZMANN (representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation), had any intention to take anything by force. FAISAL and WEIZANN agreed that these essential concepts were important enough to set down in writing:

• All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
​

And these concepts were set down in writing and given such consideration, by the Allied Powers at 1920 San Remo Conference, that they were amplified and included in the Mandate for Palestine. (See Articles 2, 4, and 6) If there was some "colonization agenda," THEN it was not just the Zionist involved --- but with the knowledge and active participation by the Arab Community and agreed to by the Allied Powers to which Turkey renounced all territorial rights and title; and with the understanding that "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned" (the appropriate Allied Powers). (See Article 16 of the Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne, 24 July, 1923; See Part III --- Sections VII Articles 94 thru 97 and Article 132, Treaty of Peace between the Allied Powers and Turkey Signed at Sevres 10 August 1920; and again See Article 16, The Armistice of Mudros, 30 October, 1918)

Even before the Treaty of Lausanne went into force, the first of the significant clashes called the "Bloody Passover" riot of March 1920 occurred (prompting the creation of the first version of the Haganah in June), and then the1929 Riots violence at the Wailing Wall had occurred, organized the a former enemy Ottoman Army Officer turn Islamic Mufti of Jerusalem; and the Palestinian Black Hand was founded.

It is hypothesized that Haj Amin al-Husseini was a prime mover and personality involved in the organization of the 1920 Riots, which he politically benefited from in his 1921 rise to Mufti of Jerusalem. And again, Haj Amin al-Husseini was a principle instigator behind the 1929 riots. While there are nearly always overtones in any Islamic clash, behind it all was the power, wealth, and prominent influence that came with the leadership that was behind the anti-Jewish movement.

Any time you talk about immigration and settlements --- and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonisation and disposession." And in the same vein, it was nothing that the senior Arab Leadership in the immediate post-War years, did not understand and appreciate.

It is rare to find a pro-Palestinian that does not blame all the regional ills on the Israelis. Similarly, most Israelis see the Palestinians as the dominant influence in the Regional history of 1920 to the present in rioting, murder, hijacking, piracy, bombing and general assaults on Israeli citizens. Both positions take the extreme, and both have elements of truth and disinformation in them. But at the end of the day, both side are now at the line of an unproductive line or pursuit. The region is no closer to peace today, then it was in 1920. and it is not likely to change if the leadership does not open a dialog.

Most Respectfully,
R

and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonization and dispossession."​

Are you implying that is false?

(COMMENT)

HRH Prince Faisal agreed to "large Scale" --- Jewish Immigration "as quickly as possible." In 1919, the was no delineation as to what constituted "Palestine." Further, there were no "Palestinian Leaders" that wanted to participate in the consultation on all matters relating to immigration; belligerently declining that opportunity 3 times.

HRH Prince Faisal was the Arab authority of the day, in that time and place. Say what you want, but the Immigration (not colonization) proceeded in accordance the agreement, and without any Palestinian objection.

Most Respectfully,
R

Say what you want, but the Immigration (not colonization) proceeded in accordance the agreement, and without any Palestinian objection.​

Are you shittin' me. You didn't really just say that, did you?

It's simple, really. Being objectively absent, palistanians didn't objectively object, of course. Their fault.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Obviously NO! ----

Was either Faisal or Weizmann Palestinian?

(COMMENT)

But there again, neither Faisal or Weizmann where officers of Opposition Forces to the Allied Powers in WWI and WWII.

The Arab League was born on 22 March 1945, and the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) were not exclusively "Palestinian" either. The AHC was the Principle organ of the Arab community of territroy under the Mandate for Palestine. The AHC was not established on UNTIL April 1936, by Haj Amin al-Husayni, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, a former Ottoman Combat Arms Officer, and instigator of the 1929 Riots. There was no Palestine organization, or a cooperative leader in the Arab community in the region of Palestine. Even the AHC turned out to be belligerent.

In fact, in 1919, when HRH Prince Faisal and Chairman Weizmann made the agreement, the designation of Palestine was not yet defined. Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, was not fully delineated until the Franco-British Boundary Commission concluded its survey and the Paulet-Newcombe Line was adopted in 1923. Three attempts between 1920 and 1923, were made to establish an institution for the Arab population of Palestine similar to the Jewish Agency; but to no avail. AND, it was not until the Treaty of Alliance between the UK and Trans-Jordan (AKA: Treaty of London, 22 March 1946), that the sovereignty and independence of the Arab State of Transjordan, to be known as the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, which establish was was to become the formal Eastern boundary of the territory subject to the Mandate of Palestine; but excluding Trans-Jordan. (The exceptions and clarification being: 1) Between 1928 and 1946, a series of successive British-Transjordanian treaties gradually led to full independence for Transjordan in 1946. 2) The Jordan - Saudi Arabia Boundary which was re-delimited as a result of a bilateral agreement signed on August 10, 1965.)

Sorry, you can't use that as a legitimate argument. The foremost respected and prominent Arab Leader of the Region was HRH Prince Faisal. And even those that were indigenous regional Arabs, did not want to establish self-governing institutions.

Most Respectfully,
R

In fact, in 1919, when HRH Prince Faisal and Chairman Weizmann made the agreement, the designation of Palestine was not yet defined.​

So?

By then the Palestinians had openly opposed the Zionist colonial project for 20 years. If heeded, we would not be in the hundred year, and counting, war that we are in now.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Obviously NO! ----

Was either Faisal or Weizmann Palestinian?

(COMMENT)

But there again, neither Faisal or Weizmann where officers of Opposition Forces to the Allied Powers in WWI and WWII.

The Arab League was born on 22 March 1945, and the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) were not exclusively "Palestinian" either. The AHC was the Principle organ of the Arab community of territroy under the Mandate for Palestine. The AHC was not established on UNTIL April 1936, by Haj Amin al-Husayni, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, a former Ottoman Combat Arms Officer, and instigator of the 1929 Riots. There was no Palestine organization, or a cooperative leader in the Arab community in the region of Palestine. Even the AHC turned out to be belligerent.

In fact, in 1919, when HRH Prince Faisal and Chairman Weizmann made the agreement, the designation of Palestine was not yet defined. Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, was not fully delineated until the Franco-British Boundary Commission concluded its survey and the Paulet-Newcombe Line was adopted in 1923. Three attempts between 1920 and 1923, were made to establish an institution for the Arab population of Palestine similar to the Jewish Agency; but to no avail. AND, it was not until the Treaty of Alliance between the UK and Trans-Jordan (AKA: Treaty of London, 22 March 1946), that the sovereignty and independence of the Arab State of Transjordan, to be known as the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, which establish was was to become the formal Eastern boundary of the territory subject to the Mandate of Palestine; but excluding Trans-Jordan. (The exceptions and clarification being: 1) Between 1928 and 1946, a series of successive British-Transjordanian treaties gradually led to full independence for Transjordan in 1946. 2) The Jordan - Saudi Arabia Boundary which was re-delimited as a result of a bilateral agreement signed on August 10, 1965.)

Sorry, you can't use that as a legitimate argument. The foremost respected and prominent Arab Leader of the Region was HRH Prince Faisal. And even those that were indigenous regional Arabs, did not want to establish self-governing institutions.

Most Respectfully,
R

And even those that were indigenous regional Arabs, did not want to establish self-governing institutions.​

Do you have a link to that?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes I did say it. The Arabs, at some point, must take responsibility for their action. In the present day, where the Arab-Palestinians object to peace negotiations without pre-conditions, is not the first time, nor the second time, nor event the third time, they have refused to come to the negotiation table --- and then complain about the outcome that they made not contribution to or provided input for.

"Say what you want, but the Immigration (not colonization) proceeded in accordance the agreement, and without any Palestinian objection."

Are you shittin' me. You didn't really just say that, did you.

(FROM THE RECORD)

The Political History of Palestine under British Administration --- The First Attempt to Create Self-Governing Institutions, 1922-23

22. Later in 1923, a third attempt was made to establish an institution through which the Arab population of Palestine could be brought into cooperation with the government. The mandatory Power now proposed “the establishment of an Arab Agency in Palestine which will occupy a position exactly analogous to that accorded to the Jewish Agency”. The Arab Agency would have the right to be consulted on all matters relating to immigration, on which it was recognised that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration”. The Arab leaders declined that this offer on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people. They added that, never having recognised the status of the Jewish Agency, they had no desire for the establishment of an Arab Agency on the same basis.

“The British Government desired to establish a self-government in Palestine, but to proceed in this direction by stages…. It had been announced that the nominated Advisory Council was to be the first stage. The second stage would have been a Legislative Council without an Arab majority. If this worked satisfactorily, the third stage, after a lapse of perhaps same years, would have been a constitution on more democratic lines.”
​

In practice it proved impossible even to initiate this policy of gradual constitutional development. From 1922 until the present day, the High Commissioner has governed Palestine with the aid of Councils consisting exclusively of British officials. SOURCE: A/AC.14/8 2 October 1947​

(COMMENT)

Now as we all know, the Immigration Effort over time, was curtailed several time by the Mandatory; as it capitulated to Arab Pressures brought to a head by the Arab Revolt. As the pressures to escape anti-Jewish programs increased, and the increased Jewish immigration, attempting to escape the Nazi regime solutions ---- as well as a general rise in anti-Semitism throughout Europe created a bottleneck forcing many Jews to face German round-ups. The revolt which largely prompted the Mandatory to restrict Jewish immigration was orchestrated by the Grand Mufti, Haj Amin Al-Husseini and Nazi Sympathizer.

"His opposition to the British peaked during the 1936–39 Arab revolt in Palestine. In 1937, evading an arrest warrant, he fled Palestine and took refuge in, successively, the French Mandate of Lebanon and the Kingdom of Iraq, until he established himself in Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. During World War II he collaborated with both Italy and Germany by making propagandistic radio broadcasts and by helping the Nazis recruit Bosnian Muslims for the Waffen-SS. On meeting Adolf Hitler he requested backing for Arab independence and support in opposing the establishment in Palestine of a Jewish national home. At war's end, he came under French protection, and then sought refuge in Cairo to avoid prosecution." SOURCE: Wikipedia
​

To deny that the Arabs, of the territory subject to the Mandate for Palestine, refused to participate in the self-government process and to provide direct advise and input on the immigration issue, is nothing more than (as Arab Palestinians often do) avoiding the consequences of their action.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Like I use to tell my kids --- "you don't always get what you want in real life."

By then the Palestinians had openly opposed the Zionist colonial project for 20 years. If heeded, we would not be in the hundred year, and counting, war that we are in now.

(COMMENT)

It was not their decision to make.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes I did say it. The Arabs, at some point, must take responsibility for their action. In the present day, where the Arab-Palestinians object to peace negotiations without pre-conditions, is not the first time, nor the second time, nor event the third time, they have refused to come to the negotiation table --- and then complain about the outcome that they made not contribution to or provided input for.

"Say what you want, but the Immigration (not colonization) proceeded in accordance the agreement, and without any Palestinian objection."

Are you shittin' me. You didn't really just say that, did you.

(FROM THE RECORD)

The Political History of Palestine under British Administration --- The First Attempt to Create Self-Governing Institutions, 1922-23

22. Later in 1923, a third attempt was made to establish an institution through which the Arab population of Palestine could be brought into cooperation with the government. The mandatory Power now proposed “the establishment of an Arab Agency in Palestine which will occupy a position exactly analogous to that accorded to the Jewish Agency”. The Arab Agency would have the right to be consulted on all matters relating to immigration, on which it was recognised that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration”. The Arab leaders declined that this offer on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people. They added that, never having recognised the status of the Jewish Agency, they had no desire for the establishment of an Arab Agency on the same basis.

“The British Government desired to establish a self-government in Palestine, but to proceed in this direction by stages…. It had been announced that the nominated Advisory Council was to be the first stage. The second stage would have been a Legislative Council without an Arab majority. If this worked satisfactorily, the third stage, after a lapse of perhaps same years, would have been a constitution on more democratic lines.”
​

In practice it proved impossible even to initiate this policy of gradual constitutional development. From 1922 until the present day, the High Commissioner has governed Palestine with the aid of Councils consisting exclusively of British officials. SOURCE: A/AC.14/8 2 October 1947​

(COMMENT)

Now as we all know, the Immigration Effort over time, was curtailed several time by the Mandatory; as it capitulated to Arab Pressures brought to a head by the Arab Revolt. As the pressures to escape anti-Jewish programs increased, and the increased Jewish immigration, attempting to escape the Nazi regime solutions ---- as well as a general rise in anti-Semitism throughout Europe created a bottleneck forcing many Jews to face German round-ups. The revolt which largely prompted the Mandatory to restrict Jewish immigration was orchestrated by the Grand Mufti, Haj Amin Al-Husseini and Nazi Sympathizer.

"His opposition to the British peaked during the 1936–39 Arab revolt in Palestine. In 1937, evading an arrest warrant, he fled Palestine and took refuge in, successively, the French Mandate of Lebanon and the Kingdom of Iraq, until he established himself in Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. During World War II he collaborated with both Italy and Germany by making propagandistic radio broadcasts and by helping the Nazis recruit Bosnian Muslims for the Waffen-SS. On meeting Adolf Hitler he requested backing for Arab independence and support in opposing the establishment in Palestine of a Jewish national home. At war's end, he came under French protection, and then sought refuge in Cairo to avoid prosecution." SOURCE: Wikipedia
​

To deny that the Arabs, of the territory subject to the Mandate for Palestine, refused to participate in the self-government process and to provide direct advise and input on the immigration issue, is nothing more than (as Arab Palestinians often do) avoiding the consequences of their action.

Most Respectfully,
R

22. Later in 1923, a third attempt was made to establish an institution through which the Arab population of Palestine could be brought into cooperation with the government.​

Indeed, but to cooperate with the government would be to cooperate with the Zionist colonial project. They would be cooperating with their own demise.

That is really one stupid argument to make.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Like I use to tell my kids --- "you don't always get what you want in real life."

By then the Palestinians had openly opposed the Zionist colonial project for 20 years. If heeded, we would not be in the hundred year, and counting, war that we are in now.

(COMMENT)

It was not their decision to make.

Most Respectfully,
R

So you prefer perpetual war over granting the Palestinians universal, inalienable rights?

 

[Phoenall]

"P F Tinmore, et al,

I'm saying that the simplistic view is naive and with political blinders.

Challenger, et al,

Agreed. But then, in almost every conflict involving Muslims and Jewish, religion becomes an element. It does not mean that the focus of the conflict was along religious lines.

True. Although you cannot ignore the effects of religion in this conflict, Zionist Hasbara likes to focus on the religious element in order to deflect from the fact that from the very start, the Zionist objective was colonisation and disposession by force, which would necessitate the extermination or expulsion of the indigenous population in order to ultimately create a state for Jewish people only.

(COMMENT)

In 1919 The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement made a few of the early intents a matter of record:

• [T]he surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible, collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine,

• The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories.

• Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.
​

The record and the very first Arab-Jewish Agreement, of the long line of agreements that were to followed, made it plain that NEITHER --- His Royal Highness the Amir FAISAL (representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ), and Dr. CHAIM WEIZMANN (representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organisation), had any intention to take anything by force. FAISAL and WEIZANN agreed that these essential concepts were important enough to set down in writing:

• All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
​

And these concepts were set down in writing and given such consideration, by the Allied Powers at 1920 San Remo Conference, that they were amplified and included in the Mandate for Palestine. (See Articles 2, 4, and 6) If there was some "colonization agenda," THEN it was not just the Zionist involved --- but with the knowledge and active participation by the Arab Community and agreed to by the Allied Powers to which Turkey renounced all territorial rights and title; and with the understanding that "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned" (the appropriate Allied Powers). (See Article 16 of the Treaty of Peace with Turkey Signed at Lausanne, 24 July, 1923; See Part III --- Sections VII Articles 94 thru 97 and Article 132, Treaty of Peace between the Allied Powers and Turkey Signed at Sevres 10 August 1920; and again See Article 16, The Armistice of Mudros, 30 October, 1918)

Even before the Treaty of Lausanne went into force, the first of the significant clashes called the "Bloody Passover" riot of March 1920 occurred (prompting the creation of the first version of the Haganah in June), and then the1929 Riots violence at the Wailing Wall had occurred, organized the a former enemy Ottoman Army Officer turn Islamic Mufti of Jerusalem; and the Palestinian Black Hand was founded.

It is hypothesized that Haj Amin al-Husseini was a prime mover and personality involved in the organization of the 1920 Riots, which he politically benefited from in his 1921 rise to Mufti of Jerusalem. And again, Haj Amin al-Husseini was a principle instigator behind the 1929 riots. While there are nearly always overtones in any Islamic clash, behind it all was the power, wealth, and prominent influence that came with the leadership that was behind the anti-Jewish movement.

Any time you talk about immigration and settlements --- and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonisation and disposession." And in the same vein, it was nothing that the senior Arab Leadership in the immediate post-War years, did not understand and appreciate.

It is rare to find a pro-Palestinian that does not blame all the regional ills on the Israelis. Similarly, most Israelis see the Palestinians as the dominant influence in the Regional history of 1920 to the present in rioting, murder, hijacking, piracy, bombing and general assaults on Israeli citizens. Both positions take the extreme, and both have elements of truth and disinformation in them. But at the end of the day, both side are now at the line of an unproductive line or pursuit. The region is no closer to peace today, then it was in 1920. and it is not likely to change if the leadership does not open a dialog.

Most Respectfully,
R

and argument can be made using the simplistic understand of "colonization and dispossession."​

Are you implying that is false?

(COMMENT)

HRH Prince Faisal agreed to "large Scale" --- Jewish Immigration "as quickly as possible." In 1919, the was no delineation as to what constituted "Palestine." Further, there were no "Palestinian Leaders" that wanted to participate in the consultation on all matters relating to immigration; belligerently declining that opportunity 3 times.

HRH Prince Faisal was the Arab authority of the day, in that time and place. Say what you want, but the Immigration (not colonization) proceeded in accordance the agreement, and without any Palestinian objection.

Most Respectfully,
R

Say what you want, but the Immigration (not colonization) proceeded in accordance the agreement, and without any Palestinian objection.​

Are you shittin' me. You didn't really just say that, did you.

Are you saying that muslims are telling LIES................ The evidence provided shows that this was the case initially, until people like the grand mufti saw a means of going on a murder spree and getting hold of other peoples property