Part Two

As you can imagine when 11% of the population start laying claims to a whole nation things start to get a bit heated. So the 12th Zionist Congress in 1921 tried to cool things down with the following resolution:

“We do thereby reaffirm our desire to attain a durable understanding which shall enable the Arab and Jewish peoples to live together in Palestine on terms of mutual respect and co-operate in making the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which will assure to each of these peoples an undisturbed national development.”

Notice it's still one nation, one nation called Palestine. Just to emphasise the point, the following notes were attached to that resolution -

“2. (a) The Jews on the one hand and the Arabs on the other are to be regarded as living side by side on a footing of perfect equality in all matters, including the official use and recognition of their respective languages.
(b) In areas in which there is a mixed population, the rights of the minority are to be fully guaranteed, including the right of representation on the local administrative bodies.
(c) The existence in Palestine of the Jewish National Home is not to be a bar to the recognition of Palestine, when the time is ripe, as a self-governing commonwealth.
….......
5. Jewish immigration is to be limited by the capacity of Palestine, from time to time, to absorb it, but not otherwise. It is declared that there is not nor has there ever been any intention to disturb the existing Arab population or any part of it. The right of the Arab inhabitants and their descendants to the secure enjoyment of their homes and prosperity is unequivocally recognised and guaranteed.

No more mention of a Jewish commonwealth, just a national home in Palestine, not separate from or adjacent to. It appears that the Zionists have come around finally to accept that they are a community within Palestine. Churchill's 1922 White Paper reaffirmed this concept. It referenced the Carlsbad resolution and added -

Part Three

“.......the Balfour Declaration does not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded in Palestine........… The status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status”.

So clearly up until 1937 the Palestinian mandate was one nation, one nationality. By the time of the Peel commission over 200,000 Jews had poured into Palestine. So much for limiting Jewish immigration. As civil unrest broke out throughout Palestine, Peel could see no alternative but partition. In less than 20 years native Palestinians saw their dreams of nationhood shattered. Their opposition to the partition is understandable, but the Zionist's? No sooner had the inked dried on the Peel report before Ben Gurion was penning -
“A partial Jewish state is not the end, but only the beginning . . . we will not be prevented from settling in other parts of the country.....”

He was one of a long line of Zionist leaders that wanted Palestinians out of Palestine. Long before the PLO was even created, Zionists were hell bent on claiming all of Palestine as a Jewish state.

I do not need to deceive or lie to explain how people of all faiths lived peacefully in Palestine prior to World War 1. Nor how that peace was shattered by a people that were not content with asylum and citizenship. The imposition of Israel on Palestine is nothing more than a perverse punishment for the crimes Europe had and were perpetrating on the Jewish people, with the holocaust being the final nail in the nation of Palestine's coffin.

More lies and false statements.

You state:
1. "The Peel Commission was a 1936 British Royal Commission investigating the unrest in Palestine following a six month general strike. The report came out in 1937. It's conclusion was that the League of Nations Mandate was now unworkable and that, for the first time, it recommended partitioning Palestine. This demonstrates very, very clearly that the Mandate viewed Palestine as a single entity, one nation, a nation called Palestine."

(i) The Mandate did not view Palestine as a single entity, nor one nation as was made clear by Article 25 of the Mandate dated 24 July 1922.

(ii) On 23 September 1922 a memorandum submitted by the British Representative to the League of Nations pursuant to article 25 restricted the reconstitution of the Jewish National Home to 23% of the territory comprised in the Mandate.

(iii) Britain then set up a separate Arab administration in the remaining 77% of Mandatory Palestine - Transjordan.

(iii) The Jews accepted this 1922 decision. The Arabs did not because they wanted 100%.

(iv) The Peel Commission concluded:
"Treaties of alliance should be negotiated by the Mandatory with the Government of Trans-Jordan and representatives of the Arabs of Palestine on the one hand and with the Zionist Organisation on the other. These Treaties would declare that, within as short a period as may be convenient, two sovereign independent States would be established--the one an Arab State consisting of Trans-Jordan united with that part of Palestine which lies to the east and south of a frontier such as we suggest in Section 3 below; the other a Jewish State consisting of that part of Palestine which lies to the north and west of that frontier."

This is the two-state solution that was agreed to by the Jews and rejected by the Arabs in 1937 and is still rejected by them in 2017.

Three posts full of further lies and irrelevant documents with the exception of the 1922 White Paper.

Yet not a word substantiating your false claim that a Palestinian Jew is no different from a Palestinian Moslem.

Your pompous emotional outbursts are evermore risible David.

David brought Judaism into this discussion as evidence that the Zionist movement has been ongoing for thousands of years. Any submitted evidence is open to deconstruction to ascertain its validity. Evidence clearly shows a very, very small percentage of the global population of Jews residing in Palestine in the early 1800's. The increase of Jewish residents in the latter half of the 1800's shows the Ottomans had no problem allowing new Jewish residents. Either the diaspora were not practicing their religion or Judaism did not promote Zionism.

The evidence supports the latter. What's the saying David, 'not every Jew is a Zionist and not every Zionist is a Jew'. The Jewish numbers in Palestine only started to rise when the Zionist's started funding expeditions to Palestine in the late 1800's. Even then, depleted funds saw the vast majority of these expeditionary Jews leave Palestine. It took thousands of years to have the first ever Zionist congress in 1897. It took till the 23rd congress in 1951 to hold a congress in the homeland. Where better to have a congress to promote the return of the diaspora, especially given the rise of the Nazis in the 1930's. Then there was the substantial Jewish opposition to Zionism, especially among orthodox Rabbis and scholars. Admittedly a significant amount of this opposition dissipated after the extent of the horrors of the Holocaust became known. But all that proves is what I've said all along, the primary driver of the Zionist movement was the persecution suffered by Jews in Europe.

That's why I'll always tolerate you David. Because there's nothing like the droppings of an extreme Zionist to air the obnoxious stench of Zionist hypocrisy.

"This country exists as the fulfillment of a promise made by God Himself. It would be ridiculous to ask it to account for its legitimacy." - Golda Meir, Le Monde, 15 October 1971

Presenting the Torah as historical fact to support Zionist claims cannot be left unchallenged. The Middle East is an active archaeological region. The digs show that the Moses, David and Solomon narratives have no validity as historical records. Many archaeologists are Jewish, are they guilty of denigrating Judaism David? Literal beliefs of the Abrahammic religions faded fast in the latter half of the twentieth century. They are the stuff of theological extremists like Islamic State. Claiming divine right in the 20th century is akin to claiming Jews are a sub-human race. A sick irony is that as the Nazis “othered” the Jews as inferior, the Zionists “othered” non-Jews as inferior.

Factor in David's reference to the Peel commission....(more later)......
“One reason why no public allusion to a State was made in 1922 was the same reason why no such allusion had been made in 1917. The National Home was still no more than an experiment. Some 16,000 Jews had entered Palestine in I920 and 1921. The Arab population was about 600,000. It would be a very long time, it seemed, before the Jews could become a majority in the country. "

Using a Peel Commission reference stating that this was the first time partition had been called for led to David calling me a liar. This discussion is primarily about Palestine not Jordan, or Transjordan. The Peel Commission population figures above refer to Palestine as we know it. Clearly the Peel Commission's “first partition” was referring to that same Palestine. The Jews made up 11% of the population in 1920/21 but the Zionists wanted 100% of Palestine. Important note - Zionists wanted 100%, not Jews. Jews in Palestine were actively campaigning against a Zionist state.

Three phrases of note in the above Peel Commission reference -
1. “no public allusion to a state”
2. “no more than an experiment”
3. “before the Jews could become a majority”

Now factor in the 15th Article of the Palestine mandate....... No discrimination OF ANY KIND shall be made between the inhabitants of Palestine on the ground of race, religion or language..........

“No public allusion to a state”; from the outset native Palestinians, including the native Jewish community, were discriminated against. Guinea pigs in a Zionist ethnic gerrymandering experiment. No native say in self-determination until there was a Zionist majority. A twentieth century version of the Moses myth. Zionist settlers pour into modern day Canaan to claim their divine right. Articles 4, 6, 7, 11, and 13 clearly contradict article 15 too. Never a Jewish majority in the Palestinian boundaries the Zionists sought. Rather than accept a failed experiment and gain an equal place in a new nation, the Zionists chopped the baby in half and without any "public allusion to their intent", would settle the other half at a later stage. The settlements in the West Bank prove that intent to settle remains in 2017.

The Palestinian Mandate is one of the most perfidious acts of the twentieth century.
The Anglo-French Declaration made in 1918 by the governments of France and Great Britain after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire stated "the complete and final liberation of the peoples who have for so long been oppressed by the Turks, and the setting up of national governments and administrations deriving their authority from the free exercise of the initiative and choice of the indigenous populations." Compare that to a British Foreign minister promising a British Zionist to back the right of alien Zionists to impose a state on indigenous Palestinians. You will not find better examples of perfidy and hard core colonial racism.