These are racist pigs, who decided to attack a town and beat up a little child. If Palestinians did this to some Jews in Israel, than they get labelled as terrorist, get murdered for what they did and their houses get destroyed with or without their family in it. Such a thing is called "justice" in Israel and no doubt you think it's all justified too. That the Palestinians had to beat them up, the get rid of them... was a pure necessity. Because the IDF is too racist to protect civilians when they are Palestine.
These racist Jews, these "Pricetag" pigs, deserve nothing but acute lead poisoning. Too bad Moderate Jews like me don't have enough power.
Don't trust it if it doesn't suit you, but the IDF DID make several arrests. They typically don't arrest Israelis for spitting on sidewalks.
If that is what you believe , then I'd just be flogging the proverbial dead MULE to continue . Meanwhile don't expect everyone else to be daft enough to believe as you do.. tata...
True. But no where does the Mandate state that Britian 'owns' Palestine. Britian's job was to administer the country "until such time as they are able to stand alone." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covenant_of_the_League_of_Nations
OMG - How dishonest of you . - where + when did I say the Mandate was illegal "? I've just told you I'd be flogging a dead MULE to continue with anyone as deeply entrenched as you appear to be Apart from your daft claims you've FAILED to support any of it with any evidence and now you've got the chutzpah to ask me for evidence ???? Frankly I do not think that any sort of evidence from whichever source , challenging your Zionist indoctrination. No evidence would make the slightest difference to you. ----- ---- I doubt you'd understand any of the following from wiki , I therefore post it for other readers who might find it of interest> ----- "In 1942, the Biltmore Program was adopted as the platform of the Zionist Organization, with an explicit call "that Palestine be established as a Jewish Commonwealth." In 1946, the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry, also known as the Grady-Morrison Committee, noted that the demand for a Jewish State went beyond the obligations of either the Balfour Declaration or the Mandate and had been expressly disowned by the Chairman of the Jewish Agency as recently as 1932. (**^ See the report of the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine, UN Document A/364, 3 September 1947**) ======= ]*** ]Zionists again spoke with forked -tongue ?) ==== The United Nations Special Committee on Palestine said the Jewish National Home, which derived from the formulation of Zionist aspirations in the 1897 Basle program has provoked many discussions concerning its meaning, scope and legal character, especially since it had no known legal connotation and there are no precedents in international law for its interpretation. It was used in the Balfour Declaration and in the Mandate, both of which promised the establishment of a "Jewish National Home" without, however, defining its meaning. A statement on "British Policy in Palestine," issued on 3 June 1922 by the Colonial Office, placed a restrictive construction upon the Balfour Declaration. The statement excluded "the disappearance or subordination of the Arabic population, language or customs in Palestine" or "the imposition of Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole", and made it clear that in the eyes of the mandatory Power, the Jewish National Home was to be founded in Palestine and not that Palestine as a whole was to be converted into a Jewish National Home. The Committee noted that the construction, which restricted considerably the scope of the National Home, was made prior to the confirmation of the Mandate by the Council of the League of Nations and was formally accepted at the time by the Executive of the Zionist Organization. ====
But about the conflicting promise Britiam made to the Arabs? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMahon-Hussein_Correspondence "...it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine_(legal_instrument)
yes, and the League of Nation and the Allies at the San Remo Conference all agreed that part of the role of the Mandate would be to create a homeland for the Jews in Palestine.
Ronstar Britain very definitely did not own Palestine. Indeed it is argued that she and France deliberately decided not to because if they had stated a claim to own any territory which they had seized, they would not be able to claim such large war reparations from Germany and the Ottoman's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Nations_mandate#Hidden_agendas_and_objections The most commonly held belief for why the British, in 1917, in the middle of the war, should suddenly send a letter to Lord Shaftsbury is simply antisemitism, that they believed that Jews 'ruled the world' and if they could get them on side, they would get the US into the war and Britain would win http://jewishquarterly.org/2008/03/the-balfour-declaration-origins-and-consequences/ This despite the reality that the vast majority of Jews were not in favour of any National home or state. On the British side there will no doubt also have been input from the Christian Zionists who had been pressing for this ever since they got Bibles and misunderstood the message but who had most strongly been pressing since the 19th C convincing other politicians that it would be a good strategic position. However given the timing it seems more likely that it was that background plus their belief that Jews had such enormous power which gave rise to them making this promise - one they certainly had not thought through - due no doubt in no small measure because before the granting of a National Home most Jews were strongly against it. Palestine was seen by the League of Nations as being Class A, meaning that the people were seen as being about ready for Independence and just needed some help in understanding how to do administration and so on. As Juan Cole argues well here http://www.juancole.com/2010/03/map-story-of-palestinian-nationhood.html the Mandate was for the people of Palestine.
The record might have shown that these Arabs planted on Land that is not theirs a priori. There are no poor Arabs in Israel, it seems after all that THE ISRAELI AND I REPEAT ISRAELI ARABS ARE NOT ON THE DOLE.
Yes it is the simple truth. And that next post of yours where the Jews claim they were not in that town, is a lie. That is actually what this thread is about. They got busted being liars and racist terrorist. They should be shot by the IDF, just like the IDF does vs Palestinians when they attack. But the IDF is simply too racist.
What are you talking about ? - - - Updated - - - The punishment for murder and vandalism/theft should not be the same, we are not Iran....
I didnt make any post about "Jews not being in a town" - dont know what you are talking about, "They" - "Price tag" are truley racist and terrorists, no arguments here. They should not be shot because they didnt kill anyone, likewise Palestinians are not being shot but arrested if possible (that's why there are Palestinian prisoners....)on the same token Price tag should and are being arrested, IDF is arresting them, its the legal system that's problematic and lets them off easy, IDF is not racist its just "liberal" whinny BS.
I'm talking about the topic story, which obviously was fabricated by palestinians. I repeat it especially for you: there is no evidence of settlers entering into the palestinian town, there is no evidence about wounded young palestinian boy, which was initially presented as the main reason of capturing and beating of settlers. There were several contradictory versions based only on "as palestinians told". No evidence, nothing. Only pictures of severely beaten settlers. If you have real evidences that I'm wrong it will be greeted.
Not true that the IDF stands by and does nothing but watch as Palestinians (whom they are ordered to protect) are attacked by Zionist squatters? I beg to differ: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.567676
Sorry, Im going with the formal decleration of the authoreties, these ppl are suspected for price tag activity, ill accept what the court decides.
Its a militant group inside the more fanatic settlers, there is a great diffrence between who lives in say east Jerusalem and deep inside the WB "outposts" thou techniclly both are "settelrs" in the eyes of the law.
