Two Israeli soldiers were arrested by Hezbullah forces/movie

[BritinBritain]

Will you be so kind as to tell the readers why the sergeants were hanged? If you don't or cannot, I will and can.

BTW, that mined and boobytrap thing, it was an IED. (A. J. Sherman (2001). Mandate Days: British Lives in Palestine, 1918-1948. The Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-6620-0.)

I have one more question, the Irgun and the palestinians both use(d) the same rhetoric and methods then why is one labeled as savages and the others are hailed as freedomfighters?

I know perfectly well why the two British Sergeants were hanged, my dad was there when it happened. But I would love to hear your excuses as to why you support the cold blooded murders, and that such murders are acceptable.

The mined and booby trapped thing was an IED?????? That's your excuse? Are you saying that it was perfectly legitimate? To booby trap bodies and mine the area to cause more deaths is nothing less then savagery. The Palestinians didn't murder the two Sergeants in cold blood, Irgun terrorists did.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews voiced Anglo-Jewry's 'detestation and horror at the appalling crime committed against innocent British soldiers' and the Anglo-Jewish Association branded the Irgun action as 'a barbarous act of a kind peculiarly repugnant to civilised man.' Similar criticism poured in from all sections of Anglo-Jewry, including the Association of Jewish Ex-Service Men and Women who condemned outright the murder by terrorists of the two Army sergeants.

As so often the case before, the editorial of the Jewish Chronicle captured the grave and foreboding mood of the moment. In one particularly poignant passage the JC expressed Anglo-Jewry's shame at the Irgun murders: 'Although the general public in Britain recognise that Jewry in this country are powerless to prevent the outrages, British Jewry cannot but feel a deep sense of shame that these murders have been committed.'

VDKMS you are so full of bullsh!te your eyes have got to be dark brown.

 

[MontyB]

The difference is that the Jewish boy was hit by a deliberate attack on civilians, the Palestinian ones through collateral damage because of a retaliation. If the photo is not a fake of course because the doctors are wearing neat white coats.

Anyway, it is a pity that innocent Palestinians die because of the unreasoned and useless attacks of the fanatics.

Are you seriously going to argue that injuring or killing children out of revenge is more justifiable than a direct attack on civilians?

You are talking about the difference between a people using unguided rockets out of necessity because they have no more accurate weapons to use and a trained military that has the capacity to put ordnance within meters of its aiming point over a 20+ mile range.

The reality is that the only reason there are large numbers of Palestinian casualties is that Israel regards them as expendable, it doesn't care who it hits with its rockets any more than Hamas does and I am prepared to bet that if Israel thought it could get away with the whole sale genocide of the Palestinians it wouldn't hesitate and worst of all people like yourself would still say "but they bought it on themselves".

I like many others also find it somewhat ironic that a nation born of terrorism and that continues to carry out assassinations around the world can now sit back and bleat about the evils of terrorism, perhaps as a nation that pretends to be pious they should acquaint themselves with the "live by the sword, die by the sword" fable.

 

[VDKMS]

I know perfectly well why the two British Sergeants were hanged, my dad was there when it happened. But I would love to hear your excuses as to why you support the cold blooded murders, and that such murders are acceptable.

The mined and booby trapped thing was an IED?????? That's your excuse? Are you saying that it was perfectly legitimate? To booby trap bodies and mine the area to cause more deaths is nothing less then savagery. The Palestinians didn't murder the two Sergeants in cold blood, Irgun terrorists did.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews voiced Anglo-Jewry's 'detestation and horror at the appalling crime committed against innocent British soldiers' and the Anglo-Jewish Association branded the Irgun action as 'a barbarous act of a kind peculiarly repugnant to civilised man.' Similar criticism poured in from all sections of Anglo-Jewry, including the Association of Jewish Ex-Service Men and Women who condemned outright the murder by terrorists of the two Army sergeants.

As so often the case before, the editorial of the Jewish Chronicle captured the grave and foreboding mood of the moment. In one particularly poignant passage the JC expressed Anglo-Jewry's shame at the Irgun murders: 'Although the general public in Britain recognise that Jewry in this country are powerless to prevent the outrages, British Jewry cannot but feel a deep sense of shame that these murders have been committed.'

VDKMS you are so full of bullsh!te your eyes have got to be dark brown.

Nowhere did I say that I supported the act of the Irgun. But when you tell a story you must tell it all. As promised here it is:

On 28 May 1947 the British tried Avshalom Haviv, Yaakov Weiss and Meir Nakar (all Irgun members) for wearing weapons when caught near a prison wall on the 4 may (Acre prison break - they didn't kill anyone). On 16 june they got the verdict : sentenced to the death penalty. On July 8, the governor of the British military forces in Palestine confirmed the death sentence. Several days later the two British sergeants were captured by the Irgun and would be killed if the death sentence for the three was executed. Jews (Haganah) and British soldiers searched door to door for the sergeants but couldn't find them. On 29 July the three were hanged. The following day the sergeants were hanged. After that the British stopped carrying out death sentences.

My point of view is that these were terrorist actions from the Irgun, but what they did was the same as what the palestinians are doing now. I condemn the actions of the Palestinians and the Irgun.

But condemning Irgun and concur what the Palestinians do is unfair.

Irgun members were fighting for their homeland (a lot of them were native Jews who always lived in the region Palestine) just as the Palestinians now.
The difference is that Irgun fought the British and the Palestinians are now fighting the Jews.

The British promised the Jews a homeland that got smaller and smaller and unlimited immigration that went to almost a stop. In the beginning they protected the Jews (who also fought with them in WWII) and in the end fought against them.

Jews felt betrayed but against all odds kept cooperating with the British. They disbanded the Irgun after the British left.

But there's more. You condemn Israeli attacks against the palestinians but when the British commited atrocities against the palestinians during their mandate I suppose you concur?

excerpt from "The Banality of Brutality: British Armed Forces and the Repression of the Arab Revolt in Palestine, 1936 – 39", by Matthew Hughes

British accounts also detail soldiers bayoneting innocent Arabs and Arab fighters in battle being machine gunned en masse by men from the Royal Ulster and West Kent regiments as they came out to surrender near Jenin. ‘At one time the Ulsters and West Kents caught about 60 of them [Arab guerrillas] in a valley and as they walked out with their arms up mowed them down with machine guns. I inspected them afterwards and most of them were boys between 16 and 20 from Syria …. No news of course is given to the newspapers, so what you read in the papers is just enough to allay public uneasiness in England.'

Are you seriously going to argue that injuring or killing children out of revenge is more justifiable than a direct attack on civilians?

Where did I say that the Jews kill children out of revenge??????
I said that they got killed through collateral damage. I think you know what collateral damage means.

You are talking about the difference between a people using unguided rockets out of necessity because they have no more accurate weapons to use and a trained military that has the capacity to put ordnance within meters of its aiming point over a 20+ mile range.

They do not fire those rockets out of necessity, they do it because they wanted to and their aim is a civilian town with schools and hospitals. They know very well that casualties will be civilians, young and old. And they do have rockets that are more accurate, they used an RPG to shoot at a school bus.
Israel uses very accurate rockets with small warheads to minimise collateral damage and they aim at the terrorists not at civilian targets although the terrorists always play the civilian when hit.

 

[benaakatz]

Ya, it may surprise people here, but the British were ruthlessly brutal when they put down the Arab revolt from 1936-1939.

They burned down whole villages and committed numerous massacres (i.e. mowing down whole groups of palestinians)

Funny how they never get he nazi nominer from people on this site

 

[benaakatz]

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=284567

are the PA security forces Nazis for firing at protesters with live ammunition? from the standards on this site, these guys are bona-fide waffen SS. i mean skipping rubber bullets and going straight to live ammunition? all the protesters were doing were throwing stones!

 

[MontyB]

Ya, it may surprise people here, but the British were ruthlessly brutal when they put down the Arab revolt from 1936-1939.

They burned down whole villages and committed numerous massacres (i.e. mowing down whole groups of palestinians)

Funny how they never get he nazi nominer from people on this site

Come on I can do better than that the British even invented concentration camps during the Boer war and what could be more "Nazi" than that however the bit you seem to want to over look is that it was "barely" acceptable then but I am sure had there been an internet and instantaneous new feeds in 1900 there would have been a huge outcry about that to.

Your problem now is that you can not hide behind time and distance any longer, what you do today the world knows minutes later.

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=284567

are the PA security forces Nazis for firing at protesters with live ammunition? from the standards on this site, these guys are bona-fide waffen SS. i mean skipping rubber bullets and going straight to live ammunition? all the protesters were doing were throwing stones!

No that is called bad government but what they do in their own land to their own people is a matter for the Palestinians to decide however what you do as an occupying power is a matter for the international community to decide please stop trying to confuse the two.

Any other last ditched excuses you want to try?

Where did I say that the Jews kill children out of revenge??????
I said that they got killed through collateral damage. I think you know what collateral damage means.

You said they were killed by Israeli retaliation, and I quote...

Open up your eyes! The IDF is in the West Bank to get the suicide bombers and terrorists before they can enter Israel, and it works! Stop the 5% fanatics and make a peace deal. Look at Jordan and Egypt how to do it. Most, if not all, Palestinian casualties come from IDF retaliations not attacks.

Interesting as the definition of retaliation is...

re·tal·i·ate (r-tl-t)
v. re·tal·i·at·ed, re·tal·i·at·ing, re·tal·i·ates
v.intr.
To return like for like, especially evil for evil.
v.tr.
To pay back (an injury) in kind.

Now a thesaurus has this to say...

Retaliation:
Noun - action taken in return for an injury or offense
Synonyms:
revenge, getting even, paying back, return - a reciprocal group action; "in return we gave them as good as we got", vengeance, payback, retribution - the act of taking revenge (harming someone in retaliation for something harmful that they have done) especially in the next life; "Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord"--Romans 12:19; "For vengeance I would do nothing. This nation is too great to look for mere revenge"--James Garfield; "he swore vengeance on the man who betrayed him"; "the swiftness of divine retribution"
reprisal - a retaliatory action against an enemy in wartime.

So to answer your question that is where you said Israel was in the revenge business.

To use a nice old phrase and I love being able to revive old phrases you are being hoisted with one's own petard.

 

[BritinBritain]

Nowhere did I say that I supported the act of the Irgun. But when you tell a story you must tell it all. As promised here it is:

On 28 May 1947 the British tried Avshalom Haviv, Yaakov Weiss and Meir Nakar (all Irgun members) for wearing weapons when caught near a prison wall on the 4 may (Acre prison break - they didn't kill anyone). On 16 june they got the verdict : sentenced to the death penalty. On July 8, the governor of the British military forces in Palestine confirmed the death sentence. Several days later the two British sergeants were captured by the Irgun and would be killed if the death sentence for the three was executed. Jews (Haganah) and British soldiers searched door to door for the sergeants but couldn't find them. On 29 July the three were hanged. The following day the sergeants were hanged. After that the British stopped carrying out death sentences..

If you are going to tell a story, tell it all, I see you have convenient skipped the booby traps on the bodies of the murdered Military Policemen and the mining of the area. So according to you, its perfectly OK for terrorists to walk around carrying weapons near a prison wall in an attempt to free other terrorists? What in your opinion should have been the appropriate punishment? A slap on the wrist and no sweeties for a month? So what they didn't kill anyone, it wasn't for lack of trying.

My point of view is that these were terrorist actions from the Irgun, but what they did was the same as what the Palestinians are doing now. I condemn the actions of the Palestinians and the Irgun.

But condemning Irgun and concur what the Palestinians do is unfair.

Show me where I condoned anything, I didn't. Again you are making up stories and trying to divert from the fact that the Irgun were nothing less than murdering savage thugs.

Irgun members were fighting for their homeland (a lot of them were native Jews who always lived in the region Palestine) just as the Palestinians now.

A lot of them, so you are saying that some/most/many are not native to the area? So in effect, they should not in fact be there.

The difference is that Irgun fought the British and the Palestinians are now fighting the Jews.

The British promised the Jews a homeland that got smaller and smaller and unlimited immigration that went to almost a stop. In the beginning they protected the Jews (who also fought with them in WWII) and in the end fought against them.

The Irgun fought AGAINST the British in WW2. If you are going to tell a load of bullsh!te get it right. Perhaps the British did promise the Jews a homeland, but not at the expense of Palestinian Arabs to be abused and treated like vermin.

Jews felt betrayed but against all odds kept cooperating with the British. They disbanded the Irgun after the British left.

Cooperating by planting bombs, blowing up the King David Hotel *where 91 people were killed, including 28 British soldiers, policemen and civilians, and hanging British Sergeants among other acts of terror? The Irgun were planting booby traps killing and maiming Palestinians as well as British troops as early as 1939. In 1944 and 1945 while British troops were liberating camps such as Bergen Belson, the Irgun were attacking British troops, You have a weird idea of cooperating.

But there's more. You condemn Israeli attacks against the Palestinians but when the British committed atrocities against the Palestinians during their mandate I suppose you concur?

Show me where I supported (concur in your words) the British acts of violence against the Palestinians during the British mandate, you can't sunbeam. In fact I do not condone it whatsoever. Promises that were made by the British and French to the Arabs during WW1 should never have been broken when the war was over. It doesn't matter how you cut it, the Palestinian Arabs have more right to be in Palestine then anybody, European Jews have no more right to be in Palestine then I have.

Israel uses very accurate rockets with small warheads to minimise collateral damage and they aim at the terrorists not at civilian targets although the terrorists always play the civilian when hit.

What a load of bollocks, air strikes are accurate and have small warheads? I wouldn't be surprised if you had the star of David stamped on your forehead.

 

[VDKMS]

you said they were killed by Israeli retaliation, and I quote...



Interesting as the definition of retaliation is...

re·tal·i·ate (r-tl-t)
v. re·tal·i·at·ed, re·tal·i·at·ing, re·tal·i·ates
v.intr.
To return like for like, especially evil for evil.
v.tr.
To pay back (an injury) in kind.

Now a thesaurus has this to say...

Retaliation:
Noun - action taken in return for an injury or offense
Synonyms:
revenge, getting even, paying back, return - a reciprocal group action; "in return we gave them as good as we got", vengeance, payback, retribution - the act of taking revenge (harming someone in retaliation for something harmful that they have done) especially in the next life; "Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord"--Romans 12:19; "For vengeance I would do nothing. This nation is too great to look for mere revenge"--James Garfield; "he swore vengeance on the man who betrayed him"; "the swiftness of divine retribution"
reprisal - a retaliatory action against an enemy in wartime.

So to answer your question that is where you said Israel was in the revenge business.

To use a nice old phrase and I love being able to revive old phrases you are being hoisted with one's own petard.

You forgot (deliberately?) collateral damage. Pleace find the definition of that!

My Post #59 : ..the Palestinian ones through collateral damage because of a retaliation..

------------

If you are going to tell a story, tell it all, I see you have convenient skipped the booby traps on the bodies of the murdered Military Policemen and the mining of the area. So according to you, its perfectly OK for terrorists to walk around carrying weapons near a prison wall in an attempt to free other terrorists? What in your opinion should have been the appropriate punishment? A slap on the wrist and no sweeties for a month? So what they didn't kill anyone, it wasn't for lack of trying.

I have told you that they have put an IED underneath the hanged bodies, I also gave you the source from where I got that, I have not seen your source so I cannot verify it. They did put a note to read on the bodies.
Those three should have gotten a heavy imprisonment for several years. The others who were caught unarmed got life sentences. Even Israel doesn't give such heavy sentences to terrorists.

Show me where I condoned anything, I didn't. Again you are making up stories and trying to divert from the fact that the Irgun were nothing less than murdering savage thugs.

Irgun were terrorists just as the fanatical Palestinians and Jihadis. The one is not better than the other.

A lot of them, so you are saying that some/most/many are not native to the area? So in effect, they should not in fact be there.

I concur to that if that applies to everyone, so the Arabs shouldn't have been there too, including Arafat, and the Turks and Libaneze and of course the British. And the native Jewish Palestinians would have the same rights for their country as the native Palestinians. Don't you agree?

The Irgun fought AGAINST the British in WW2. If you are going to tell a load of bullsh!te get it right. Perhaps the British did promise the Jews a homeland, but not at the expense of Palestinian Arabs to be abused and treated like vermin.

First I didn't say that the Irgun fought with the British in WWII, I said "the Jews". In fact, Irgun had a truce with the British at the beginning of WWII and was split up between the ones who fought with the British and others (Stern gang) kept fighting against the British. Begin (new Irgun leader) reversed the truce in early 1944.
The Palestinians were the first to attack the Jews. Hagannah was created as a defensive force but when the attacks didn't stop the Irgun was formed and they went on the offensive and were as cruel as the Palestinian attackers.

Cooperating by planting bombs, blowing up the King David Hotel *where 91 people were killed, including 28 British soldiers, policemen and civilians, and hanging British Sergeants among other acts of terror? The Irgun were planting booby traps killing and maiming Palestinians as well as British troops as early as 1939. In 1944 and 1945 while British troops were liberating camps such as Bergen Belson, the Irgun were attacking British troops, You have a weird idea of cooperating.

You fail to see that the Jews considered the Irgun as terrorists. The Haganah worked together with the British to catch the terrorists up untill the end of WWII. After that they turned against the British because they felt betrayed.
Do not forget that the British did not (or to late) intervened when the Palestinians were attacking and massacring the Jews, and this was before the creation of the Haganah or Irgun.

Show me where I supported (concur in your words) the British acts of violence against the Palestinians during the British mandate, you can't sunbeam. In fact I do not condone it whatsoever. Promises that were made by the British and French to the Arabs during WW1 should never have been broken when the war was over. It doesn't matter how you cut it, the Palestinian Arabs have more right to be in Palestine then anybody, European Jews have no more right to be in Palestine then I have.

I did not say you concur, I said I suppose you concur. I agree with you that the French and British (and the UN) are for a great deal responsible for the situation in Palestine. I disagree about the Palestinian Arabs, they came from outside Palestine and as such have no more right than the ones who came from Russia or Europe.

What a load of bollocks, air strikes are accurate and have small warheads? I wouldn't be surprised if you had the star of David stamped on your forehead.

I have something better: (from THE ISRAELI ARSENAL DEPLOYED AGAINST GAZA DURING OPERATION CAST LEAD)

Fake Missiles
The IDF acknowledged (4/22/09) using fake missiles designed not to explode in order to frighten Gaza’s civilian population during OCL. Calling the tactic “a knock on the roof,” the IDF described firing fake missiles onto the roofs of buildings to scare residents into evacuating the area, portraying this as a method “to ensure that Palestinian civilians could avoid harm.

 

[MontyB]

You forgot (deliberately?) collateral damage. Pleace find the definition of that!

Here is an online dictionary..

www.dictionary.com

I think it is time you did some research work of your own.

But I would also tell you that if you keep dancing around the issues like you are you will probably wear a hole in the floor long before you convince anyone of your cause.

 

[senojekips]

I have something better: (from THE ISRAELI ARSENAL DEPLOYED AGAINST GAZA DURING OPERATION CAST LEAD)

What a load of Bullsh!t.
Why would the IDF go to the bother of using fake missiles whilst there is video evidence showing very clearly that the IDF were firing White Phosphorus and HE into the city? Unless of course it was to panic the civil population into the streets where the WP and High Explosive would have the greatest effect effect on them?

 

[MontyB]

What a load of Bullsh!t.
Why would the IDF go to the bother of using fake missiles whilst there is video evidence showing very clearly that the IDF were firing White Phosphorus and HE into the city? Unless of course it was to panic the civil population into the streets where the WP and High Explosive would have the greatest effect effect on them?

If I was a conspiracy theorist I would say firing blanks to drive a population out in a country that has an abandonment clause would make sense.
What could be better than free land?.

However I am not a conspiracy type guy so I am sure they are only doing it out of compassion.

 

[BritinBritain]

I have told you that they have put an IED underneath the hanged bodies, I also gave you the source from where I got that, I have not seen your source so I cannot verify it. They did put a note to read on the bodies.
Those three should have gotten a heavy imprisonment for several years. The others who were caught unarmed got life sentences. Even Israel doesn't give such heavy sentences to terrorists.

They put a note on the bodies, yet to get to those bodies British troops have to cross a minefield laid by the cowardly bastards.

Irgun were terrorists just as the fanatical Palestinians and Jihadis. The one is not better than the other.

Again you are throwing in red herrings.

I concur to that if that applies to everyone, so the Arabs shouldn't have been there too, including Arafat, and the Turks and Libaneze and of course the British. And the native Jewish Palestinians would have the same rights for their country as the native Palestinians. Don't you agree?

The British didn't want to be there, it was a mandate given to them after WW1.

The same Jewish Palestinians who are trying to throw out the Arab Palestinians, the same Jewish Palestinians who are taking away the land and the rights of Arab Palestinians and treating them like vermin.

First I didn't say that the Irgun fought with the British in WWII, I said "the Jews". In fact, Irgun had a truce with the British at the beginning of WWII and was split up between the ones who fought with the British and others (Stern gang) kept fighting against the British. Begin (new Irgun leader) reversed the truce in early 1944.

Yeah Begin were fighting the British who were still fighting a major war and dying in their thousands. What a pity the British didn't capture Begin and hanged the scum bag

In fact the Stern gang tried to do a deal with the Germans.

Lehi leader Avraham Stern thought of forming an alliance with the Axis powers in 1941, in exchange for their help in establishing a Jewish state and allowing the Jews of Europe to resettle in Palestine. His letter to the German ambassador in Turkey was never answered.

The Palestinians were the first to attack the Jews. Hagannah was created as a defensive force but when the attacks didn't stop the Irgun was formed and they went on the offensive and were as cruel as the Palestinian attackers.

I suggest that you check out the list of Jewish attacks on Palestinian Arabs right from 1937. The list is too long to post here

You fail to see that the Jews considered the Irgun as terrorists. The Haganah worked together with the British to catch the terrorists up untill the end of WWII. After that they turned against the British because they felt betrayed.

Yeah they turned against the very people who fought and died liberating camps like Bergan Belson, INCLUDING survivors of Auschwitz.

Do not forget that the British did not (or to late) intervened when the Palestinians were attacking and massacring the Jews, and this was before the creation of the Haganah or Irgun.

Although the British administration did not officially recognize the Haganah, the British security forces cooperated with it by forming the Jewish Settlement Police, Jewish Supernumerary Police and Special Night Squads, which were trained and led by Colonel Orde Wingate. The battle experience gained during the training was useful in the 1948 Arab–Israeli War.

I did not say you concur, I said I suppose you concur. I agree with you that the French and British (and the UN) are for a great deal responsible for the situation in Palestine. I disagree about the Palestinian Arabs, they came from outside Palestine and as such have no more right than the ones who came from Russia or Europe.

Absolute Bollocks

"But condemning Irgun and concur what the Palestinians do is unfair."

YOUR words not mine.

After WW1, it was the League of Nations that gave the mandate to Britain, not the UN. The Palestinian Arabs were in Palestine long before the European Jews. Who in your opinion has more right then anyone to be in Palestine?

I have something better: (from THE ISRAELI ARSENAL DEPLOYED AGAINST GAZA DURING OPERATION CAST LEAD)

People should try reading a bit before forming opinions on a complex subject. Helps keep you from looking like a fool.

 

[VDKMS]

Here is an online dictionary..

www.dictionary.com

I think it is time you did some research work of your own.

But I would also tell you that if you keep dancing around the issues like you are you will probably wear a hole in the floor long before you convince anyone of your cause.

Who is dancing around the issue? Why won't you admit that collateral is not deliberately targeted?

What a load of Bullsh!t.
Why would the IDF go to the bother of using fake missiles whilst there is video evidence showing very clearly that the IDF were firing White Phosphorus and HE into the city? Unless of course it was to panic the civil population into the streets where the WP and High Explosive would have the greatest effect effect on them?

maybe you believe it with this link

australiansforpalestine

They put a note on the bodies, yet to get to those bodies British troops have to cross a minefield laid by the cowardly bastards.

I could only find the IED under the hanging bodies not a minefield. Please give me a link to it. Another (Israeli link) said a booby trap blew Martin's body to bits when it was cut down. No mention of an IED or minefield.
After that British troop went on a revenge spree and killed 5 Jews. This is deplorable but understandable. Maybe you know how the Jews felt when they were first attacked by the Palestinians (and not the way around).

The British didn't want to be there, it was a mandate given to them after WW1.

I'm not so sure they didn't want to be there (I'm talking about the leadership, not the soldiers).They could have refused but then the whole ME would be without British influence. Propably giving it to France.

The same Jewish Palestinians who are trying to throw out the Arab Palestinians, the same Jewish Palestinians who are taking away the land and the rights of Arab Palestinians and treating them like vermin.

That's an overstatement.

Yeah Begin were fighting the British who were still fighting a major war and dying in their thousands. What a pity the British didn't capture Begin and hanged the scum bag

He fought the British at the end of the war (1944 onwards).

In fact the Stern gang tried to do a deal with the Germans.
Lehi leader Avraham Stern thought of forming an alliance with the Axis powers in 1941, in exchange for their help in establishing a Jewish state and allowing the Jews of Europe to resettle in Palestine. His letter to the German ambassador in Turkey was never answered.

Avraham Stern tried it after the split with Irgun (he called his group Lehi), he also tried to contact the Italian fascists. Irgun and Lehi were not liked. He beleived that the allies would lose the war.

Here is the text of a Irgun leaflet (Benyamin Zeroni):

To avoid disrupting the course of the war against Germany, and in order to invest maximum effort in assisting Great Britain and its allies, the Irgun Zvai Le'umi has decided to suspend all offensive activities in Palestine which could cause harm to the British government and in any way be of assistance to the greatest enemy the Jewish people has ever known - German Nazism.

I suggest that you check out the list of Jewish attacks on Palestinian Arabs right from 1937. The list is too long to post here

The Palestinians started to attack the Jews from 1919! (small suicide groups, fedayeen, organised by Haj Amin al-Husseini, the later Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and friend of Eichmann.). They are attacking the Jews up untill today! If you deduct the retaliations from your list it will be a whole lot shorter.

Yeah they turned against the very people who fought and died liberating camps like Bergan Belson, INCLUDING survivors of Auschwitz.

That's an insult to the more than 30.000 Jews who fought with the British.
And what about the 1,584 immigrant jews on the Atlantic who were deported in 1940 by the British from Haifa to Mauritius in contradiction with their mandate? Or the ones who were deported to Cyprus in 1943?

Although the British administration did not officially recognize the Haganah, the British security forces cooperated with it by forming the Jewish Settlement Police, Jewish Supernumerary Police and Special Night Squads, which were trained and led by Colonel Orde Wingate. The battle experience gained during the training was useful in the 1948 Arab–Israeli War.

I fully agree

After WW1, it was the League of Nations that gave the mandate to Britain, not the UN. The Palestinian Arabs were in Palestine long before the European Jews. Who in your opinion has more right then anyone to be in Palestine?

A little but important complement. One of the first sentences of the Palestine Mandate was:
"Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country"

My opinion is that all Jews must be allowed to go back to their homeland. They were kicked out by the ancestors of the ones who lived their prior to the founding of Israel.

People should try reading a bit before forming opinions on a complex subject. Helps keep you from looking like a fool.

I do not regret one word I have said about the ME conflicts.
If I would not have reacted on wrong facts, altered pictures, directed videos, wrong quotes, fabricated facts, then yes I would have looked like a fool.

 

[BritinBritain]

I could only find the IED under the hanging bodies not a minefield. Please give me a link to it. Another (Israeli link) said a booby trap blew Martin's body to bits when it was cut down. No mention of an IED or minefield.

http://rense.com/general81/tedp.htm
British sergeants hanged, July 12, 1947. Begin, Shamir, and Haganah authorized kidnapping and hanging of two British sergeants, booby trapping their bodies and mining the area. During this time, Shamir sent many letters and package bombs to British officials. 1947 also included multiple cases of kidnappings (including brutal floggings of British soldiers) by Jewish terrorists.

After that British troop went on a revenge spree and killed 5 Jews. This is deplorable but understandable. Maybe you know how the Jews felt when they were first attacked by the Palestinians (and not the way around).

Its a pity British troops didn't do a better job of it.

I'm not so sure they didn't want to be there (I'm talking about the leadership, not the soldiers).They could have refused but then the whole ME would be without British influence. Propably giving it to France.

From October 1946, opposition leader, Winston Churchill, began calling for Palestine to be given to the UN.

Avraham Stern tried it after the split with Irgun (he called his group Lehi), he also tried to contact the Italian fascists. Irgun and Lehi were not liked. He beleived that the allies would lose the war.

He backed the wrong side obviously.

The Palestinians started to attack the Jews from 1919! (small suicide groups, fedayeen, organised by Haj Amin al-Husseini, the later Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and friend of Eichmann.). They are attacking the Jews up untill today!

Yeah with rocks, while the Jews retaliate with machine guns and rockets.

If you deduct the retaliations from your list it will be a whole lot shorter.

Wrong again.
As I said, the list is far too long to post here.

That's an insult to the more than 30.000 Jews who fought with the British.

Insult or not, it happened.

And what about the 1,584 immigrant jews on the Atlantic who were deported in 1940 by the British from Haifa to Mauritius in contradiction with their mandate? Or the ones who were deported to Cyprus in 1943?

They were not deported, they were denied entry, there is a difference.

A little but important complement. One of the first sentences of the Palestine Mandate was:
"Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country"

It also says:- Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine

My opinion is that all Jews must be allowed to go back to their homeland. They were kicked out by the ancestors of the ones who lived their prior to the founding of Israel.

WHAT?

I do not regret one word I have said about the ME conflicts.

Being a firm supporter of Israel you wouldn't

If I would not have reacted on wrong facts, altered pictures, directed videos, wrong quotes, fabricated facts, then yes I would have looked like a fool.

Yeah ok lol

 

[senojekips]

Who is dancing around the issue? Why won't you admit that collateral is not deliberately targeted?

The fact being that any atrocity by the Israelis is always "Accidental" and those killed are always quoted as "collateral damage". If one were to believe the Israeli definition of "collateral damage" and "Accidental" death, the victims of the Holocaust would clearly fall under the same definition.

maybe you believe it with this link
australiansforpalestine

Did you bother to read who provided the information in that article?

The IDF acknowledged (4/22/09) using fake missiles....

Clearly stating that this is merely a transcript of what the IDF said, and their past record preceeds them in these matters, we all know that they will say anything at all to limit or excuse their liability when they commit a crime.. (see the same article) "An Israeli soldier sits next to pallets of artillery shells outside the northern Gaza Strip, 5 January 2001. The light-colored shells are M825A1 white phosphorous projectiles, which the Israel Defense Forces denied using until confronted with photographic evidence". (Gil Cohen Magen/Reuters)



It's quite obviously an attempted cover up, as it is not in keeping with Israeli practices and secondly it is illogical, as all it would do is to drive the civil population into the open where Israeli HE and WP could have the greatest effect. Unless of course that was their intention?

So much for the "fake missile" story, if it's untrue, it is just another Israeli lie, which is no less than we would expect from the Israelis,... and if it is true, it is a de facto admission of another Israeli War Crime, or at least a Crime against Humanity.

My opinion is that all Jews must be allowed to go back to their homeland. They were kicked out by the ancestors of the ones who lived their prior to the founding of Israel.

The Jews were "allegedly" driven out by the Romans, see how you go wanting a State in Italy? Remember. the Christians were also driven out at this time, so what would happen if the christians decided they wanted to partition of all the best parts of Israel and push the Jews out?

The Jewish state comes to an end in 70 AD, when the Romans begin to actively drive Jews from the home they had lived in for over a millennium

 

[Yossarian]

The fact being that any atrocity by the Israelis is always "Accidental" and those killed are always quoted as "collateral damage". If one were to believe the Israeli definition of "collateral damage" and "Accidental" death, the victims of the Holocaust would clearly fall under the same definition.

There is no accidental war crime. Israel on mulitple occassions has shown almost deleriberate disregard towards the impact of Operations on the Palestinian people.

Routinely have they been locked down by Israeli troops under the guise of a "threat to security". If there were such a base of hostility they would have been in a state of armed contact with Israel long ago. And I mean large scale contact.

Israel has routinely shown over the years to quickly snap down and report the "dangerous situation" regarding the few areas left that house a majority of the Palestinian population. Any hint of resistance and the airwaves are awash with the usual terms : "terrorist attacks" "National Security Risk" " Unwarranted aggression against Israel" and my favorite "A necessary precaution to move troops into these areas". For "security screening".

Did you bother to read who provided the information in that article? Clearly stating that this is merely a transcript of what the IDF said, and their past record preceeds them in these matters, we all know that they will say anything at all to limit or excuse their liability when they commit a crime.. (see the same article) "An Israeli soldier sits next to pallets of artillery shells outside the northern Gaza Strip, 5 January 2001. The light-colored shells are M825A1 white phosphorous projectiles, which the Israel Defense Forces denied using until confronted with photographic evidence". (Gil Cohen Magen/Reuters)

Oh this is not the first time that Israel has left bread crumbs behind indicating the use of devastating weapons. Rumors abound about multiple uses of Napalm as well as Phosphorous munitions against populated areas.

And SS retribution style crack downs on Gaza in the past.

Once again however simultaneously with these troop movements, comes the blitz over the airwaves condemning the very people who are shouting for help. Palestine who are rushed out of the streets under artillery and tank fire.

Israel broadcasting seems to use the notion that if you are first to send out the news, then you can count on the lazy analyst to just take what come first and believe it, meaning the careless listeners around the globe.

Lastly I wonder who the manufacturer of those shells and weapon canisters are, which most likely had U.S. stamped on them. And people hear stateside have absolutely no clue "Why do them people over there hate us so much?".

 

[senojekips]

And people hear stateside have absolutely no clue "Why do them people over there hate us so much?".

You summed up the whole issue in that one sentence.

No one want's to bite the bullet and admit that US support of Israel is both improper and immoral.

 

[MontyB]

The Jews were "allegedly" driven out by the Romans, see how you go wanting a State in Italy? Remember. the Christians were also driven out at this time, so what would happen if the christians decided they wanted to partition of all the best parts of Israel and push the Jews out?

Yeah I have been going through the family tree recently and I think I have a good solid claim to parts of Scandinavia and Britain, the Wifes lot get chunks of Germany and hell having Jewish and Catholic religious backgrounds entitles her to evict both Palestinians and Jews from the Middle East as well as a sizable chunk of dirt in Rome.

Anyone need a holiday home?

So what is the paperwork like to get this land we have had stolen from us, I just pop on over plead persecution and slaughter the inhabitants right?

I should also point out that clearly everyone with the same surname as I have will be invited to come and claim land as well as clearly we were all dispossessed.

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

Yeah I have been going through the family tree recently and I think I have a good solid claim to parts of Scandinavia and Britain, the Wifes lot get chunks of Germany and hell having Jewish and Catholic religious backgrounds entitles her to evict both Palestinians and Jews from the Middle East as well as a sizable chunk of dirt in Rome.

Anyone need a holiday home?

So what is the paperwork like to get this land we have had stolen from us, I just pop on over plead persecution and slaughter the inhabitants right?

I should also point out that clearly everyone with the same surname as I have will be invited to come and claim land as well as clearly we were all dispossessed.

Do you know which part of Scandinavia, Monty? You and your wife are so welcome.

psst, if your wife claim a part of Germany, take one with nice breweries.

 

[VDKMS]

http://rense.com/general81/tedp.htm
British sergeants hanged, July 12, 1947. Begin, Shamir, and Haganah authorized kidnapping and hanging of two British sergeants, booby trapping their bodies and mining the area. During this time, Shamir sent many letters and package bombs to British officials. 1947 also included multiple cases of kidnappings (including brutal floggings of British soldiers) by Jewish terrorists.

No doubt the sergeants killing was a terrorist act. But if the British would have given the cought members of Irgun (who didn't kill anyone) a long prison sentence instead of a death sentence the sergeants would not have been hanged or kidnapped. About your link. I always find it fishy when you do an inernet search and you get many times the same document only with a different layout.The endnotes do not refer to a text in the document so that makes it difficult to find out if it is true. Also the reference to "United Nations Security Counsel Official Records, Semiramis, 1948, Document S/740" is not to be found on the UNC website, and they list all the documents. Besides, a wording as "The Jewish Agency terrorist forces" is not exactly UNC language.
I also couldn't find the book "Menachem Begin. "The Revolt." (London, W. H. Allen, 1983.)". I have found a copy from Steimatzky's Agency Limited. I am very sceptical about that article. But like I said the killing of the sergeants was a terrorist act.

Its a pity British troops didn't do a better job of it.

So you agree to killing innocent people by the British just because they are Jewish? If that is your case then I must say that the Israelis were right to fight the British.

From October 1946, opposition leader, Winston Churchill, began calling for Palestine to be given to the UN.

But he was not in charge
The Palestine Mandate says:
"Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions"

He backed the wrong side obviously.

true

Yeah with rocks, while the Jews retaliate with machine guns and rockets.

Tell that to the parents of the Jewish boy who was killed because an rpg destroyed the school bus.

Wrong again.
As I said, the list is far too long to post here.

well, if I would use your logic (see above), I would say not long enough but I won't because I regret the death of innocent people who are killed through collateral damage.

Insult or not, it happened.

Don't focus on the minority because that gives you a wrong picture.

They were not deported, they were denied entry, there is a difference.

They were deported (by the High Commissionner) to a prison camp in Mauritius (an island of the Britis Colonial Empire) and they would stay there until 1945 (Disorderly Decolonization: The White Paper of 1939 and the End of
British Rule in Palestine page 139)

It also says:- Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine

That does not mean that you are not allowed to defend yourself against the Arab attacks. There was no reason at all to start attacking the Jews in Jerusalem , native Palestinian Jews BTW)

Being a firm supporter of Israel you wouldn't

Yes I am a firm supporter but not of the religious fanatics.

Did you bother to read who provided the information in that article? Clearly stating that this is merely a transcript of what the IDF said, and their past record preceeds them in these matters, we all know that they will say anything at all to limit or excuse their liability when they commit a crime.. (see the same article) "An Israeli soldier sits next to pallets of artillery shells outside the northern Gaza Strip, 5 January 2001. The light-colored shells are M825A1 white phosphorous projectiles, which the Israel Defense Forces denied using until confronted with photographic evidence". (Gil Cohen Magen/Reuters)


It's quite obviously an attempted cover up, as it is not in keeping with Israeli practices and secondly it is illogical, as all it would do is to drive the civil population into the open where Israeli HE and WP could have the greatest effect. Unless of course that was their intention?

First, the use of M825A1 white phosphorous shells (approved for use by NATO) is not prohibited but there are restrictions. The Israelis used it as a smoke screen in Gaza which is allowed. The IDF did not cover it up but it took them days to confirm.

So much for the "fake missile" story, if it's untrue, it is just another Israeli lie, which is no less than we would expect from the Israelis,... and if it is true, it is a de facto admission of another Israeli War Crime, or at least a Crime against Humanity.

Yeah, like putting a fake gun to someone will put you in jail for attemted murder!

The Jews were "allegedly" driven out by the Romans, see how you go wanting a State in Italy? Remember. the Christians were also driven out at this time, so what would happen if the christians decided they wanted to partition of all the best parts of Israel and push the Jews out?

Every time the Jews were driven out they came back.

Yeah I have been going through the family tree recently and I think I have a good solid claim to parts of Scandinavia and Britain, the Wifes lot get chunks of Germany and hell having Jewish and Catholic religious backgrounds entitles her to evict both Palestinians and Jews from the Middle East as well as a sizable chunk of dirt in Rome.

Anyone need a holiday home?

So what is the paperwork like to get this land we have had stolen from us, I just pop on over plead persecution and slaughter the inhabitants right?

I should also point out that clearly everyone with the same surname as I have will be invited to come and claim land as well as clearly we were all dispossessed.

Then what are you doing in the land of the Maori?