You got some PM abuse too? What a fine example of character that chap is. The answer as to why the refusal to debate is simple-he has no answer and has painted himself into a corner, leaving attack as his last resort. Not at all credible-and the threats to report? Dear god what a child!
Basically, knowledge is the Israelophiles worst enemy. Many hate nothing more than the truth. It is normal when discussing Israel/Palestine for many followers of Israel to express insults and racial smears in defense of many things Israel is doing, given that the truth and honest is not to their advantage.
No you have not!! When you accuse someone of fraud you do "NEED" to take your debate all the way, and not to claim that you can stop when you want to when you have been slaughtered in rebuttal. I say slaughtered because you have explained NONE of my recent rebuttals, many of them reiterations of years-old responses by me. None!!: # You have not explained why you accuse me of fraud for quoting a third-party who truncated some Dayan reference text. You yourself likewise quoted a third-party, Joseph Shmuel, who did not simply do a 'snip' but totally rearranged and distorted a text that he had referenced, yet you remain in wartime radio silence when this is pointed out. And this is by no means the only case, yet did I accuse you of fraud? You have therefore done ZIP to explain your hypocrisy and disrespect. Yet you say that you don't 'need' to explain your double-standards. # You have done NOTHING to explain why your own evidence clearly states that the reference statement that I quoted of Ben-Gurion's words (in The Jewish Paradox) could well have been made. Yet given that, you continue to trumpet it as an example of my fraud!! This is bizarre in the extreme. In fact it is obvious that by doing so, it is YOU who is by far the more guilty. Yet you say you don't 'need' to answer my exposure of your logical fallacy. # You have done NOTHING to explain away the detail of Rabbi Chaim Simons' analysis of why Teveth was perfectly correct in his quote of Be-Gurion's letter to his son Amos, the Teveth quote being the one that I originally supplied, and which YOU claim is fraud. Instead, what you did was something (also) quite bizarre. You pointed to some guy called Morris and, incorrectly as Rabbi Simons' data show, accused HIM (note, not Teveth) of misquotes, and then you had the gall to use this to claim that my quote of Teveth amounted to Fraud. That is a MASSIVE strawman, yet you claim you do not 'need' to explain it!! You demand free reign to state what you like. You have just so totally lost the logic of debate as you can see from the numerous posts laughing at your untenable debates, such as this 'don't need to' claim, not even to mention the forum requirements to maintain respect for fellow posters. Forum rules have been scandalously breached in this case.
Here is another similar situation taking place right now where false claims are defended with forum rule-violating personal attacks: http://www.politicalforum.com/latest-world-news/165814-global-jihad-collection-thread-20.html It is sad for Israel that more of its supporters do not challenge such problems.
These quotes don't prove anything but Intent of the authors and what was it they were agreeing and voting on. So what?
Tourists also go to see neolithic cave paintings, doesn't mean you want to have dinner with the artist.
Another example of the Apologists demanding special debating privileges - there is no rebuttal of facts, just an allegation of fraud. I will copy this to the appropriate thread.
1) Right they dont "HAVE TO" but in the real world they do + spend a great deal of time , trying to convine gullible Goyim - that they are the eternal victims and everyone is out to get them. I dont believe your 97 % nor abt the goodwill of Christian Zionists, especially those praying that all Jews be corralled /herded together in one spot (Israel) in preparation for RAPTURE / secong coming of Christ who'll at a stroke vaporize all unbelieving/disbelieving Jews and save only those Jews who repent and seek salvation in Christ. OMG - What an unholy alliance. With friends like that , who needs enemies ? HAHAHAHA ......
Would you please try and post like an adult. I find your posts, one and all, to be Trolling/Childish Baiting. There IS a Topic here. Thanks * *
Hahahaha - MORE THAN 2 months late - where've you been HAHAHAHA I dont suppose you can see the irony/hypocracy of your post. Personalizing / Ad Hominum - and dare I say exactly what you're accusing me of . GET BACK ON TOPIC. LOL - tata...
Lets check the Baiting quotes. Do you recognise this one, Try_This? Yes, it is your signature. It seems to have its origin in a book Strangers in the Land: Blacks, Jews, Post-Holocaust America by Eric J Sunquist (page 325), reference 36. Thats it. There is no other source. Just the one. And no-one seems to be able to provide any pointers as to when Abbas was alleged to have said this, where, to whom, on what occasion, in what context, etc. It is a floating claim as to a belief of Abbas which has no substance; it is non-verifiable. Yet it has gone viral in the Zionist MYTH literature. That shows you how much grasping at straws the Apologists are being forced to do as they see their MYTHS unravelling one by one. Looks like trolling/Childish baiting to me. Yup that is your signature.
Good one. Another Myth (Lie) busted. I've also checked, can't find any other source for corroboration/ verification, - only repetitions by other ZioNazis , emulating that other Nazi propagandist . If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth. J.G. '''''cheers
As long (as you have mentioned) Eric J. Sunquist) as the source of your inquest that you find "objectionable" let me say the following : it is not more objectionable than the Author that you uphold to as the Bible "Mr. Childer"... So who is 'Flamebaiting' whom? Who has the real reason to 'side track' the issue? Most of these quotes were colleted by Moshe Kohn from Brooklyn NY and published by no other than Joseph E. Katz from the Middle Eastern Political and Religious History Analyst also from Brooklyn... You see these people do not seem to care that much revealing their identity in relation to others that hide behind a symbol. So I came to the conclusion that these two are more trusting/reliable than others don't you think? Besides it was revealed to me that Mr. Abbas (Abu Mazen) was the terrorist that subsidized the Olympic Massacre in Munich... And the reason that he was not arrested and Judged is the fact that he is a leader of a group of people (probably requesting immunity)... Just a few days ago he threatened Avigdor Lieberman that after a three years spell of not wanting to sit and discuss Peace, now all of a sudden he is "ready or I shall resign"... The Foreign Minister of Israel retorted, "please do so for we never had a real partner for Peace" these past three years". I will publish the rest of the collected quotes by Katz very soon.
A collection of historical quotations relating to the Arab refugees: Collected ~by Moshe Kohn ON APRIL 23, 1948 Jamal Husseini, acting chairman of the Palestine Arab Higher Committee (AHC), told the UN Security Council: "The Arabs did not want to submit to a truce ... They preferred to abandon their homes, belongings and everything they possessed." ON SEPTEMBER 6, 1948, the Beirut Daily Telegraph quoted Emil Ghory, secretary of the AHC, as saying: "The fact that there are those refugees is the direct consequence of the action of the Arab states in opposing partition and the Jewish state. The Arab states agreed upon this policy unanimously..." ON OCTOBER 2, 1948, the London Economist reported, in an eyewitness account of the flight of Haifa's Arabs: "There is little doubt that the most potent of the factors [in the flight] were the announcements made over the air by the Arab Higher Executive urging all Arabs in Haifa to quit ... And it was clearly intimated that those Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades." On February 19, 1949, THE JORDANIAN daily Falastin wrote : "The Arab states... encouraged the Palestinian Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies." ON JUNE 8, 1951, Habib Issa, secretary-general of the Arab League, wrote in the New York Lebanese daily al-Hoda that in 1948, Azzam Pasha, then League secretary, had "assured the Arab peoples that the occupation of Palestine and of Tel Aviv would be as simple as a military promenade ... Brotherly advice was given to the Arabs of Palestine to leave their land, homes and property, and to stay temporarily in neighboring fraternal states." ON APRIL 9, 1953, the Jordanian daily al-Urdun quoted a refugee, Yunes Ahmed Assad, formerly of Deir Yassin, as saying: "For the flight and fall of the other villages, it is our leaders who are responsible, because of the dissemination of rumors exaggerating Jewish crimes and describing them as atrocities in order to inflame the Arabs ... they instilled fear and terror into the hearts of the Arabs of Palestine until they fled, leaving their homes and property to the enemy." ANOTHER refugee told the Jordanian daily a-Difaa on September 6, 1954: "The Arab governments told us, 'Get out so that we can get in.' So we got out, but they did not get in." THE PRIME Minister of Syria in 1948, Khaled al-Azem, in his memoirs, published in 1973, listed what he thought were the reasons for the Arab failure in 1948: " ... the fifth factor was the call by the Arab governments to the inhabitants of Palestine to evacuate it and leave for the bordering Arab countries ... We brought destruction upon a million Arab refugees by calling on them and pleading with them to leave their land." "FOLLOWING a visit to refugees in Gaza, a British diplomat reported the following: 'But while they express no bitterness against the Jews...they speak with the utmost bitterness of the Egyptians and other Arab states: 'We know who our enemies are,' they will say, and they are referring to their Arab brothers who, they declare, persuaded them unnecessarily to leave their homes." - IN THE MARCH 1976 issue of Falastin a-Thaura, then the official journal of the Beirut-based PLO, Mahmud Abbas ("Abu Mazen"), PLO spokesman, wrote: "The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but, instead, they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live." British Foreign Office Document #371/75342/XC/A/4991 [From "Revising or Devising Israel's History" by Prof. Shlomo Slonim in Jewish Action, Summer 5760/2000, Vol. 60 #4] This page was produced by Joseph E. Katz Middle Eastern Political and Religious History Analyst Brooklyn, New York
OK, HB, let me explain it to you. What Erskine Childers (with an "s") claimed was referenced to BBC records from their Cyprian broadcast monitoring stations and substantiated by Walid Khalidi from his research of the CIA records. All of that is documented here (click for source). Now, you claim that the support for the Abbas quote was published by “no other than Joseph E. Katz from the Middle Eastern Political and Religious History Analyst”. Can you show us an exact reference to Katz where he cites Abbas claiming what Try_This has in his signature? When you can, I will check it (cf. Childers’ advice). You just MUST know that I cannot trust your "say-so". Until then …. *CLANG* Oh, as an aside, is this the same Katz who you quoted a year or so ago in support of your claims about the persecution of Hejaz Jews. I presume you remember how you were used to wipe the floor with that one? “No other than Joseph E. Katzt” ---- LOL. And you find THAT “more trusting”. Ah well, I suppose that no matter how often the MYTHS are busted, the faithful have to continue repeating them. OHMMMM OHMMMM OHMMMM How sad. [By the way, I hope you saw that I had lodged a complaint with the local police about your threat to meet me with your Glock. They are aware that the Admin of this forum has access to your IP address. They assured me at the local village barbecue on Sunday that the post and the other info is on file and that they have noted the situation. For your sake, may I not step in front of a big red bus.]
You like you eat... do not like don't eat and remain hungry... On second thought I do not give a hoot if you eat or don't! I am shaking in my yellow farmer's boot... BTW I hope we will meet in court... I want to meet a worthy opponent, it has been a long time since I was in Spain..
ARAB REFUGEES VERSUS JEWISH REFUGEES FROM ARAB COUNTRIES ~by HBendor@aol.com The following is a well-known credo… One will not be able to change a warped mind... and, one cannot straighten a bent tree... The Arabs by nature are incited/deluded lots from womb to maturity! Apart from the words of their Qur’an who orders them to kill the non-believers, myths, chimeras and exaggerations is most of the information they get from their respective elders who in turn, have received it from their elders... This continuous hate generated at the crib will never end towards the Jews until THE TWO PEOPLES ARE SEPARATED FOREVER! Now as far as this festering boil called the Arab refugees is concerned… One has to understand that the existence of these refugees is a direct result of the Arab States' opposition to the partition plan of 1947 and the reconstitution of the State of Israel. The Arab states adopted this policy unanimously, and the responsibility of its results, therefore is theirs. There is no more apt expression than this on the origin of the Palestinian Arab refugee problem in 1948. ARAB STATEMENTS ON ARAB REFUGEES A-Difaa Sep. 6, 1954- a Jordanian publication stated: “We were master in our land, happy with our … but overnight everything changed. The Arab Governments told us ‘Get out so that we can get in. So we got out but the (the Arab governments) did not get in. Abu Mazen (2nd man in the PLO) in “Falastin el-Thawara” March 1976 wrote: The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the local Arabs from the Zionist tyranny but, instead, they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and leave their homeland, imposed on them a political and ideological blockade and threw them into prison similar to the Ghettos in which the Jews used to live. Haled al-Azn, Prime Minister of Syria in 1948, wrote in his memoirs (published in Beirut in 1973): “Since 1948, we have been demanding the return of the refugees to their homes. But we ourselves are the ones who encouraged them to leave”. These are the words of Emil Ghory, secretary of the Arab High Council, in an interview published on 6 September 1948 in the Lebanese daily Al-Telegraph, soon after the events occurred and before this topic became an important theme of Arab propaganda… The flight of Arabs from the territory allotted by the UN for the Jewish State began immediately after the General Assembly decision at the end of November 1947. This wave of emigration, which lasted several weeks, comprised some thirty thousand people, chiefly well-to-do-families. They knew that a war was imminent; they didn't doubt that the Arab armies would quickly win a sweeping victory, and they wanted to be as far as possible from the battlefield. The second wave of emigration came in the spring of 1948, after fighting had erupted between Arab irregulars and Jewish defense forces. This time the urban population was involved, and in far greater numbers - for example, some seventy thousand from Jaffa and sixty thousand from Haifa. An estimated over two hundred thousand Arabs emigrated in this wave, despite strenuous efforts of the Jews in various parts of the country to dissuade them from leaving. The Haifa Workers' Council, for example, published, on 28 April 1948, the following plea: "...our city flourished and developed for the good of both Jewish and Arab residents ... Do not destroy your homes with your own hands; do not bring tragedy upon yourselves by unnecessary evacuation and self-imposed burdens. By moving out you will be overtaken by poverty and humiliation. But in this city, yours and ours, Haifa, the gates are open for work, for life, and for peace, for you and your families." This appeal, however, and many similar ones, was of no avail. Most of the local Arab leaders had already managed to take flight, and directly or indirectly, they encouraged the Palestinian population from across the border to "temporarily" leave their homes. However, the largest wave of Arab refugees, three hundred thousand or more, followed the massive Arab invasion of 15 May 1948, the day after Israel's declaration of independence. The large majority of these emigrants were of the poorer strata of the Arab population, both urban and rural, the former group including day laborers such as the thousands of port workers who had come to Palestine from Syria. John Bern Castle, chief assessor in the mandatory government, in a report to the Conciliation Commission (comprising representatives of the United States, France, and Turkey) appointed by the UN in the fall of 1948, assessed the property abandoned by the refugees at 200 million pounds sterling -considerably less than the value of the property the nine hundred and fifty thousand Jewish refugees from Arab countries had left behind. In a discussion of the Arab refugee problem in the UN Security Council on 4 March 1949, the Soviet delegate virtually confirmed the words of the secretary of the Arab High Council previously cited. He said: "Statements have been made on the Arab refugee question, but why should the State of Israel be blamed for the existence of that problem? When seeking to determine responsibility for the existence of the problem of the Arab refugees, we cannot fail to mention the outside forces ... They pursue their own selfish interests which have nothing in common either with the cause of peace and international security or with the interests of the Arab and Jewish peoples, and which only correspond to the aggressive designs of the leading circles of some states." The fact is that the Arab attack on Israel created two parallel refugee problems - one Arab and the other Jewish. Analogous to the approximately four hundred and fifty to six hundred thousand Palestinian Arabs who fled in 1948 and found refuge in parts of various Arab countries was a somewhat larger number of Jews who emigrated from Arab countries to the Jewish State in the first years of its existence. Thus, the Middle East saw, at the end of the 1940s and the beginning of the 1950s, what amounted to a population exchange between the Arabs who left Israel and the Jews who emigrated there from the various Arab countries. These two phenomena are bound together historically, politically, and ethically, and we cannot deal with one problem (and its solution) without the other, although one of the problems has virtually been solved. The Jewish refugees from Arab countries (estimated today at one Million), never received any compensation from the Arab countries they were forced to leave and which confiscated all their property when they fled. Nevertheless, their social and economic absorption in Israel is a fait accompli, since this absorption was the clear desire and goal of the Jews of Israel and their government. In theory and in practice, these immigrants were never treated as refugees but rather as fellow members of the same people. With a sense of common national fate, rescue and assistance were extended to the immigrants, and the Jews of Israel granted the newcomers the same rights they themselves enjoyed. Such was not the attitude toward the Arab refugees from Israel in most of the Arab world. Jordanian King Hussein described this attitude in an interview with an Associated Press correspondent in January 1960: "Since 1948 Arab leaders have approached the Palestine problem in an irresponsible manner. They have not looked into the future. They have no plan or approach. They have used the Palestine people for selfish political purposes. This is ridiculous and, I could say, criminal." Hussein is perhaps the only Arab leader who had the right to express such judgment. His artificial country, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan which is in reality 77% of the "Mandate for Palestine", is the only one of the Arab states which not only granted the Palestinian refugees citizenship, but also absorbed them socially, economically, and politically, allowing them to work and become integrated into all aspects of the national life. The attitude of the other Arab states toward the Palestinian Arab refugees was, as noted, completely different. This attitude was succinctly described by Ralph Galloway, a former head of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), in Amman, capital of Jordan, in August 1958: quote:- "The Arab states do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as open sore, as an affront to the United Nations and as a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders don't give a (*)(*)(*)(*) whether the refugees live or die." Unquote... To be continued
continued from previous In a study of the refugee problems by the British writers Terrence Prittie and Bernard Dineen (The Double Exodus: A Study of Arab and Jewish Refugees in the Middle East), this aspect of the problem was summarized as follows: "In general, one can say that Arab governments regarded the destruction of the State of Israel as a more pressing matter than the welfare of the Palestinian refugees. Palestinian bitterness and anger had to be kept alive. It was clear that this could ensuring that a great many Palestinians Arabs continued to live under sub-normal conditions, the victims of hunger and poverty, do best. No Arab Government preached this as a defined policy; most Arab Governments tacitly put it into practice." This indifference on the part of the Arab states to the refugees' welfare and the cynical exploitation of their condition for political purposes stand out as unusual phenomena on the world scene. This is not the only refugee problem which has arisen since World War 11. The Arab refugees, on the contrary, constitute only a small fraction of the entire refugee population (close to 50 million) of the post-war period. Comparable problems were solved naturally by the absorption of the refugees into the lands which sheltered them, usually among peoples of similar origin, culture, religion, and language. It is illuminating to cite three examples from three different continents: In Asia: Millions of Moslems fled from India to Pakistan following the partition of that sub-continent after World War 1, and a similar number of Indians left Pakistan for India - an estimated eight million in each direction. This was a classic instance of large-scale population exchange. In Europe: Millions of Germans moved in various directions following the post-war changes in the map of Europe. According to official West German statistics, by September 1950 three million Germans had been expelled from the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia, and of these 2,069,000 were absorbed in West Germany or Austria and 916,000 in East Germany. Between 1949 and the erection of the Berlin Wall in August 1961 an additional 2,739,000 refugees from East Germany were registered in West German absorption centers. In all, over 3.5 million people fled East Germany, and another 6.75 million Germans left their homes in areas annexed by Poland, moved west, and were absorbed there. In Africa: According to official estimates, the number of French and pro- French Arabs who left North Africa for France and other locations following Algerian independence reached over one million. Refugee migration in considerable numbers also took place in China - Hong- Kong, Korea, Vietnam - Laos - Cambodia, Nigeria (lbo), Greece - Turkey, and many other countries. In all of these instances - as in the situation of the Jews from Arab countries previously described - solutions were found by absorption of the refugees into their new countries. They virtually ceased, after a time, to be considered refugees. Only the rulers of the Arab countries acted otherwise in relation to their fellow Arabs, despite the fact that most of them were victims of the clear, open, and declared invasion of the Arab armies in May 1948. After 1967 Israel was given the opportunity to help rehabilitate the Arab refugees living in those territories, which came under Israeli rule following the Six-Day War. With the initiative, encouragement, and partial financing of the Israeli government, thousands of families in the Gaza Strip and a smaller number in Judea and Samaria were moved from squalid refugee camps to new housing where they received all vital services. Due partially to this development, and partially to Arab propaganda's shift of emphasis in recent years to the national aspect of the Palestinian problem, the Arab refugee problem has lost some of its point. "The suffering of the poor refugees" is spoken of less and less, and the necessity, as it were, of creating a "Palestinian State" in order to resolve what is presented as the "lack of a homeland" of the Palestinian Arab people is mentioned with increasing frequency when 77% of the Mandate Territory for Palestine is already with Jordan.
I am going to slice this drivel into bits and take delight in separately destroying each festering segment, since to treat it as a whole would accord to it totally unwarranted unitary credence: You insist on trumpeting that the Arab states rejected the Partition Plan, and that THIS led to the refugee issue .... DIRECTLY!!. In fact, what they rejected was UN General Assembly resolution 181, which was a recommendation to Britain for a future course of actions. You have been shown this many times, but you insist on your cherry-picking view. It has been noted many times and your credibility has been duly scored. More importantly you have been shown that the major objection of the Arab states was that '181' was in violation of international law, in the form of the Mandate for Palestine which was in full rigour (validity; strictness in judgement or conduct) at the time. You have been shown on numerous occasions that clause 26 of the mandate states as follows: You have had it pointed out to you that: 1) there was clearly a conflict between members in the partition proposal. The Arab states' proposal was that the negotiations should take place; perfectly in adherence with international law. US pressure circumvented this = ILLEGAL. 2) The Arabs then insisted that that triggered clause 26 ... absolutely legally valid ... and that the Partition Proposal should therefore be submitted to the Permanent Court of International Justice. Once again US pressure caused the UN to behave in blatant violation of this law. and to vote itself the right to violate it!! You have been shown on numerous occasions that the UN resolution cited by the Zionists in their declaration of Independence was based on a flagrant violation of International Law, with obvious implications for that Declaration. Do you understand what that means for the Arab view, HB? Yet you persist in turning a blind eye to these scandalous actions by both the US and the "World Body", and pretending that the Arab States were in the wrong. The verifiable historical facts seem to pass you by like soap suds in a shower. But do not feel bad. The bulk of the "West" does exactly the same, which explains a huge chunk of the Arab fury that lasts to this day. It explains Joe the Plumber's question "Why do they hate us so much?" Read the above and learn to live with it, HB. Further blinkered conclusions cannot be justified because "We didn't know. We were only following orders" : THE ARABS THEREFORE OCCUPIED THE MORAL HIGH GROUND IN NOVEMBER 1947 and the "WEST" opened its mouth and swallowed the Zionist/Yankee MYTH. Shame on them. Go read Article 26 of the international law in the form of the Mandate for Palestine (if you dare, HB), and tell me that the Arabs were not perfectly justified. Then read your warped twist again regarding that verifiable fact. Then have the guts to aknowledge that "cause and effect" takes a linear timeline. Know what I mean? .... (Rebuttal to be continued) .....
... (Continued) ... HBendor, I challenge you to supply references back to verifiable sources for these two claims. You know and I know that they are Katz crap, and like Katz crap it sticks to woolly blankets and continues clinging through the decades no matter how many times it has been challenged. That is the nature of the Zionist MYTHS. I further point out to you that on this forum in 2010 (link broken) you were shown where Emil Ghory categorically denied these words that were attributed to him. Yet you have the gall to present them here again as though they were fact. Such is the ethics of the Zionist apologists. .... ( to be continued further) ....
I stated my points and your duty is to debunk it... Go make your own researches... you do not deserve that I do this again for you... Listen bud, you could not show me a thing because you do not know from what end a cow is milked... Your pretentiousness is overwhelming... Go open a book please and do not come here with your condescending attitude and empty knowledge on the subject.... The Arabs refused 181 this is a fact, the Arab rejected the partition this is another fact!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now what remains to do is to go back and open a book to educate yourself. You cannot teach Papa how to make babies. Have you seen a bull being slaughtered lately, did you see the picador and the matador dancing around the poor creature? Do me a favor go write about that and leave the history of my country alone... You do not know anything about it. Adios.
As I suspected, HBendor, you could provide no rebuttal to my proof that UNGAR 181 was illegal. Having received precise referenced evidence from me, as is required of sound debate, you apply the typical Zionist Apologist tactic of demanding special debating privileges by suggesting that it is I who needs to read books whereas it was YOU who failed to provide anything remotely on topic. We can read YOU like an open book, HBendor. UNGAR 181, the foundation stone for the Zionist declaration of independence, was ILLEGAL. Demonstrated WITH verifiable references. You have been unable to provide a speck of rebuttal. So swallow and walk it off. With that the cornerstone of background evidence against the Zionist Myth that the Arab Palestinians "emigrated" of own free will is, has been firmly implanted. I will next progress to your following examples of Mythical spin. In future I will ignore any of your *CLANG* empty attempted ripostes. Your readers can spot them a mile off by now, and are also well-practised at ignoring your discussions with your array of Strawmen which you use when confronted by contrary historical facts. .... (to be continued) ...
HBendor, where are your references? Are you embarrassed to show us how fragile Shmuel Katz’s claims have been in the light of professional research? Why do you quote yourself, unreferenced, as though you are a historical expert? We all know the reality. So let us continue with THE FIRST WAVE: I agree with your first wave as a minor proportion of the total cleansing - namely the flight of (rich) Arabs and Christians departing by own choice from the main cities to their resorts in the Lebanese highlands. You call it "emigration" Why? Because that false spin helps support one of the top-3 Zionist Myths ... right? There was no "Emigration", HB. Emigration is a one-way street. Those people were prevented from returning by Haganah guns. You know it and I know it, as do all honest commentators on this epoch. And even so, as I implied, that ‘emigration’ was but a drop in the ocean of the mass cleansing that was to follow. Even so, you failed to tell our readers that this “first wave emigration” was triggered by the activities of Zionist terrorist organisations. The classic example is of course the Haifa refinery act. This terrorism by Irgun took place on 29th December 1947 – note the date; well before the Convoy of 35 which Apologists use as an excuse. Here is the Wiki summary (click here): I underlined “mutual” because at this point the Zionist apologists try to make out that the Arabs were the only aggressors in the initial aftermath of the ‘181’ Resolution of 27th November 1947. Another version of the reason for the “First Wave”can be found by clicking here: The Waves of “Emigration” which you quote are those defined by Israel’s foremost historian of this period, so I presume you respect his incredibly thorough research of Israeli State archives and other sources. In future in this thread, when I mention him, Benny Morris, I mean his seminal work “The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited” (Cambridge University Press – 2004) Morris fully confirms the above account of the “first mass killing” during the lead-up to the Second Wave of the de-Arabisation of Israel. Regarding the Jews urging the Palestinians not to flee, you make it sound as if there was a concerted Jewish effort to do so. In fact it was the Arab leadership who called for calm and for their followers to stay at home. Here are some excerpts from a famous investigator of this issue, Erskine Childers (click here for source). These same facts are repeated by all historians active in this period of ME history: Yes, HBendor …. The Myths. Here I have provided verifiable evidence that the rich Palestinians did NOT decide to “emigrate”. They fled the results of the activities of Zionist terrorists, fully intending to return when the aggressions has died down. But they were never allowed to. They became refugees …. Rebuttal of “The Second Wave” in continuation. .... (to be continued) ....
