Did they catch an extremist? http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/157111 then http://www.sos-israel.com/en.html yep.... them stoned cold terrorist! there's a list of the terrorists.
Bishabi, where is this town called Nofim where the rabbi gave the speech which caused him to be summoned? Surely a citizen of a democratic country like Israel is allowed to express his own opinion about politics, in his own country? Why should, say, a British citizen be summoned to the police station for making a speech in Maidstone about the rights of the Kurds to Kurdistan. It is not like he was doing it in Turkey, is it? And it is not at all comparable to an Arab mullah going to the United Stated and preaching to Iroquois in Zanesville, Ohio that they take back their ancestral lands in the Ohio valley which were promised to them by their traditional gods .... is it? Becaue he would certainly be shown the error of his ways quick time.
go look it up. while your there look up UN Res 476, 478. There's a town that is unlawfully occupied. that aint so. Look how many died and are now in gaza because they spoke up. if it is equally a democracy, then there would be no big bibi in office and there would not be a 'religious state' preference within israel. ("no loyalty, no citizenship") You should read up on how religion dont belong in state matters, in a real democracy. ie... then no one is better than another based on beliefs. if he is claiming radical superiority over other by 'god' then you know you gotta a wingnut. big difference. the indigenous on this side of the lake have serious roots. The punks on that sisyville quest, are believing their beliefs make it true. holocaust dont mean, give the people an occupied country and the most sought after religious site on the earth (jerusalem) and then allow them to oppress people for 7 decades, because they believe god said it is so, and because a war uprooted them from their 'homeland' people need to give up the concept that israel is a good place when it causes such divide based on beliefs it is "babylon" itself of our modern era be certain, that divide will be the cause of the war of wars
Ooops ... ouch, my wink of sarcasm at the end of my previous post was obviously not enough. My apologies. Of course I agree with you. My entire post was a tongue-in-cheek attempt to highlight exactly why the Rabbi was in the doo-doo by pretending not to know. My apologies for trying to be too clever :blush: Yes, the Rabbi is living and preaching in Palestinian land. What a klutz
I conclude by stating a fact : ONE CANNOT STRAIGHTEN A BENT TREE in your case. You are completely wrong even your signature was a "Tongue in Cheek" by Ben Gurion... He was bemoaning what the Arab Fellahin were saying about the Patrimony of the Jews... Wrong again as always.
And your proof, HBendor, is where? Don't worry, because I know you have none. What you posted here is an untruth; at best a fabrication. You know what that means, don't you? I will confirm this by quoting from Nahum Goldmann's book, The Jewish Paradox. You can find the original French version - Le Paradoxe juif - here (click). But before I supply that quote, let us first establish Goldmann's impeccable credentials (click for source), to show that he was no left-field whacko: He served from 1948 to 1977 as president of the World Jewish Congress. In 1918, while working at the Jewish division of the German Foreign Ministry, he attempted to enlist Kaiser Wilhelm's support for the Zionist ideal. In January 1945, Goldmann was instrumental in the creation of a committee combining the efforts of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee (JDC) and the Jewish Agency for the rescue and rehabilitation of the remnants of the Jewish people in Europe. He was not just a Zionist but a visionary Zionist. So where is the bit about Ben-Gurion bemoaning what the Arab Fellahin were saying about the 'patrimony of the Jews', HBendor? I asked you before for a reference proving this, and I reiterate my challenge. The best that even CAMERA could do was to call this dedicated Zionist's documentation of an intimate conversation with Ben-Gurion 'hearsay'. But you know better, HBendor. In your huge library you have different information. Show us!! So you say that I am "wrong as always". Well, you have not been able to prove that my signature is false. You have not been able to prove your claim that the Mandate for Palestine is still operative, while I have shown referenced ironclad proof that it isn't. You have not been able to prove that the Palestinians are mainly relatively recent immigrants, because I have shown on many occasions that your so-called proof is woefully inadequate at best, and downright false at worst. You have not been able to prove that all the majority of the ethnically cleansed Arab settlements of 1948-1950 were made so most directly by actions of the Israeli forces and the Zionist terrorist groups; whereas you went silent when I provided evidence in support. You have not been able to prove that the Balfour accord and the Mandate for Palestine catered for a Jewish state/country in Palestine, whereas I have been able to provide rock solid evidence to the contrary. You have not been able to prove your claim that the British illegally separated Trans-Jordan from Palestine, whereas I have been able to show with source evidence that they followed League of Nations protocol to the letter. And now you accuse me of being "Wrong as Always". Who do you think believes you, HBendor? Who is the bent tree?
Well I remember we had a similar discussion and I don't remember you used "rock hard evidence" back then, it was mostly play of words and different interpretations you gave if i recall, The UN recommendations were not legit in your eyes because Britain had the final say on the mandate - you said, yet when Britain followed the same recommendations when it retreated from Palestine you said they didn't really ended the mandate, when I quoted the US president in a letter from that date that mentioned the end of the mandate and explained the reason Britain had to flee and not get involved in setting the 2 states - I don't remember what you said but you waived that one too, most of your points were argumentative to my recall, you based your points on the fact that no formal declaration came out on the establishment of a Jewish state although the evidence did show that it was heading that way if it wasn't for the Arab threat of war (those are rock hard evidence), so im sorry but at the very least by continuous denying every counter argument you cant say yours are rock solid. For Ben Gurion quote, I don't understand the fuss... Ben Gurion said what he thinks the Arabs think about peace, that doesn't change a thing, you make it sound as if he "admits" the Jewish state was wrong - which is amusing if you know the man or even the full quote that you supplied above, y'know 2 ppl can be right and still head toward conflict, that's life...., getting along is what separates us (some of us) from the Animals.
Absolutely correct, Gilos. Britain did have the last say on the matter as the Mandate holder. All the way from end-November 1947 to May 15th it was up to Britain. You are in error to believe that that evidence was not rock hard. It derives from the League of Nations protocols on mandates and the specific Mandate for Palestine. Britain promised to hand over the administration to the Palestine Commission of the UN but refused to allow this commission to become involved until she, Britain, gave the go-ahead. What is it in these that makes you think that Britain's right to administer Palestine was not totally her choice? The fact that there is another, even more serious problem with UNGAR 181, namely that it is illegal, does not detract from that. Of course Britain acted at best weakly when she continued to (semi-)abide by a UN recommendation that proved itself later to be illegal when it became obvious that the parties were not in agreement, thereby triggering clause 26 of the Mandate. Your reasoning suggests that it is clear when the mandate expired. It is not. The exact date proved to be a moving feast. One thing is sure though; the mandate did not end when the UK announced the withdrawal of its forces, nor when it started to withdraw them (15th May 194. The latest date that it could exist was 1st August 1948 but even this could be questioned, it being a result of an illegal authority which the UN granted itself in violation of the Mandate. If I had said that I had rock solid evidence as to when the mandate in fact ended, then I was incorrect to do so, but I am 99.9% sure that my comment was that Truman was out of line with his date. And I still stand by that. So, let us assume for the sake of argument that the illegality of UNGAR did not matter. What we are left with is the approval that the mandate would end when the British forces had withdrawn. That date is NOT the 14th May (nor the 15th). In fact the last British forces withdrew on 30th June 1948 (click here for source reference). Whichever way you look at it, the Israeli declaration of Independence was illegal because it violated international law, and as Shiva_TD has argued, was therefore an Act of War. I have no idea what you are on about. My signature contains a quote attributed to Ben-Gurion by someone who had a one-on-one discussion with him. Of course Ben-Gurion did not think the Jewish state was ‘wrong’. I have no idea where you got it that "I made it sound as though ...".
Because a Manager, Administrator even a CEO has the responsibility to follow its directors resolutions, it doesn't have the power to decide otherwise, true that Britain had the say WHEN it will administer the control over the land but it cant change the objective of 2 countries. Why is it illegal? No, I didnt suggest it was clear, I suggested that it was a very reasonable way to understand that action, talks of war all around, armed groups clash in increasing rate, Arab league threats, Britain states it will not get involved, If Truman letter to the UN was out on line or not is not the issue - it shows that the Mandate appeared to be over even to the US and probably to others in the UN as he directed it to them even if Britain didn't say it out loud, UN granting itself an illegal authority instead of a single state to have absolute power over an area - I can't understand that logic sorry, if Britain was acting like a colonial empire as it once was than its not recorded and it wouldn't attend the UN. Assuming you will tell me why it was illegal ill move on, at this point you neutralized the UN approval - that's not a proof that Israel was not approved, The site you quoted states this "Please note that these pages are no way intended to be Anti-Semitic ", why the hell say such a thing if you are a normal and unbiased site? it should have said many of its readers are Jews and be done with it..... Anyway, even if the last troop left on late June , what does that mean? the end of the mandate means Britain no longer administrates Palestine and the natives administrate themselves, troops and britts are not in office so to say, so the last ship left in June big deal... In more than a few sites i went throu (all actually) it stated the the UK said the mandate is over in May 14th - if that wasnt true I belive UK historians would correct that and than you would see 30 of June as the formal date in all sites and the 14th of May in a site that says "We really don't hate Arabs or anything..." The Jewish settlement did seize the chance to declare a state after nearly a century of hard work and hardships, I don't accept the notion that doing that in spite of the Arab threat is to be considered as a Jewish aggression, the Arabs that had no right to refuse the partitation plan were. its like accusing a beaten wife for making chicken for dinner when she knows her husband hates chicken... I'm not saying he didn't say that phrase which i happen to agree with BTW, I was referring to the phrase meaning - knowing what you stand for.
I really do not care if you or anyone else believe me... I am not running for office... What I say and rehash is the truth... I do not care if you believe me or others do or not... We are here, this is our land... if by any chance you want to change the status quo put your money where your mouth is and meet me with your group at the border... Adios Amigo sin compassion!
