Any 'pro-Palestinian' atheists here?

in 1922, Palestine was 11% Jewish.

and yet, the League of Nations and the British decided to turn it into a Jewish homeland.

somehow, I kinda understand why the local non-Jews would have found this to be just a weeeeee bit unfare.

and btw, it wasn't the fault or the responsibility of the local non-Jews, that Jews in Europe were getting their butt's kicked. Nor should it have been their burden.
How were Palestinians harmed by Jewish immigration Thunder? How were they burdened?

Do you feel this way for all immigrants, or just Jews?
 
If we're going by facts, it's also a fact that most of the Palestinians today are descendants of Arab immigrants who started coming to the country after the zionist movement started, and that, say, the Arabs repeatedly tried to wipe Israel off the map.

I am not quoting this to say, or insinuate (Parky's favorite sleazy method of argument) that the Palestinians have no rights. I'm merely pointing out that it's not exactly as if Parky is meticulous about facts. He only cares to protect those facts he can (accurately or otherwise) be used to deligitimize Israel and make its destruction seem like a cool anti-colonialist thing.

Facts he dislikes, like the ones I quoted above, are, naturally, "zionist propaganda".
 
How were Palestinians harmed by Jewish immigration Thunder? How were they burdened?

when a land is 89% one population and 11% another population, its just kinda sorta maybe unfare to tell the 11% that the country will be devoted to THEM..and not the overhwhelming majority group.

wouldn't you say? wouldn't you think?

how would YOU feel, if you and your ethnic group made up 90% of a land, and suddenly the international community decided to give the land away to the remaining 10%..and had plans to bring in millions more? would you be full of joy and glee?

do you really, honestly, think the local Arab Christians and Muslims should have just accepted this as okee dokee?

sure, give the land to the Jews. bring in millions more of them!!! screw the rest of us.
 
Last edited:
Do you feel this way for all immigrants, or just Jews?

They were so burdened by it that the Arab population in Palestine had grown as much as tenfold in the 50 years form the start of the zionist immigration to 1947 (but see also the important caveats in the link).

Go figure.

If Blacks moved into my neighborhood and drove White people away lowering property values, that would be a burden on the remaining White population. That would hardly make it legal or moral for them to kill their Black neighbors in return, of course, but that's another issue.

But here we have a situation where Blacks moving into the neighborhood bring a time of prosperity and increase of the White population in the neighborhood which is unprecedented in the neighborhood's history, and still some people are telling us what an awful burden having to see people with darker skin around has been for the White folks.

Isn't that racism?
 
If Blacks moved into my neighborhood and drove White people away lowering property values, that would be a burden on the remaining White population. That would hardly make it legal or moral for them to kill their Black neighbors in return, of course, but that's another issue.

interesting analogy. are you suggesting that the Jews were brought to Palestine as slaves?

:p
 
I am not quoting this to say, or insinuate (Parky's favorite sleazy method of argument) that the Palestinians have no rights. I'm merely pointing out that it's not exactly as if Parky is meticulous about facts. He only cares to protect those facts he can (accurately or otherwise) be used to deligitimize Israel and make its destruction seem like a cool anti-colonialist thing.

Facts he dislikes, like the ones I quoted above, are, naturally, "zionist propaganda".

lots of attention for moi, and a strawman argument.

I love it. :p
 
funny.

My previous statement is correct. The Balfour Declaration in 1917 and the British Mandate in 1922 made Palestine a Jewish homeland, even though only a small percentage of the population was Jewish. They made up only 11%.

No moving goalposts. Just facts. Too bad some folks here hate facts.

Um, what?

No, that isn't what the mandate did at all Parky. It's why it was formed, but it wasn't what it did. Where the hell did you pull that one from?

The Balfour declaration wasn't a ruling, merely a summary of the opinions of the British cabinet of the time, and it certainly wasn't a declaration that the area was to be given to the Jews. Indeed, Britain signed the Anglo-French Declaration of November 1918 the next year which made clear that the area would be given to the native Arabs, not the jews.

Further, when the Mandate was formed in order to smooth progression into a Jewish state (ratifying the declaration, which prior to this wasn't actually worth a great deal, the sentiments had changed. Ever heard of the Peel Commission? I have. It declared that the Mandate was a bad move, and instead the region should be divided into two, a Jewish state and an Arab one. This was later ratified by the UN, and the UN partition plan was given the full green light.

The British, unable to decide what to do after the UN effectively washed their hands of the affair, decided to spontaneously disband the Mandate and ran away from the area. The new Jewish leadership under Ben-Gurion declared independence in the same year.


Britain was never all that dedicated to the founding of a Jewish homeland in the region, they merely stated it was the preferred option, when it started to get hard to do thanks to the US, they gave up. Meanwhile the League of Nations/UN ratified anything that was passed on to them.
 

what....u wanted a more thorough response?

I read what you had to say & acknowledged it.

the string of smilies, you shall not receive. those are reserved for my compulsive fan club of Thundercats. :)
 
Last edited:
what....u wanted a more thorough response?

I read what you had to say & acknowledged it.

First of all, there are three letters in the word you. Text speak makes you look like an illiterate child and it's really abrasive to the eyes.

Secondly, I wondered what you thought, but honestly the "ok" looked dismissive. I apologise if it wasn't, but I did wonder if you would say either "thanks for the information, guess I was wrong" or "No, you're wrong because X, Y and Z".
 
Secondly, I wondered what you thought, but honestly the "ok" looked dismissive. I apologise if it wasn't, but I did wonder if you would say either "thanks for the information, guess I was wrong" or "No, you're wrong because X, Y and Z".

I don't disagree with anything you said.
 
when a land is 89% one population and 11% another population, its just kinda sorta maybe unfare to tell the 11% that the country will be devoted to THEM..and not the overhwhelming majority group.

Jordan was given to the Hashemites. Saudi Arabia was given to the House of Saud. You don't hear much complaint about that.
 
Jordan was given to the Hashemites. Saudi Arabia was given to the House of Saud. You don't hear much complaint about that.

and England belongs to the English. Ireland belongs to the Irish.

crazy world, ain't it?
 
Jordan was given to the Hashemites. Saudi Arabia was given to the House of Saud. You don't hear much complaint about that.

Because they aren't Jews, silly!

Same with the other 50+ nations or so that were declared after WWII when European mandates ended. Guess which one of those countries is the only one which is an illegitimate colonialist creation? Hint: it's the only one which is Jewish.
 
Last edited:
Because they aren't Jews, silly!

Same with the other 50+ nations or so that were declared after WWII when European mandates ended. Guess which one of those countries is the only one which is an illegitimate colonialist creation? Hint: it's the only one which is Jewish.

oh you poor opressed Jew.
 
How many other nations were created there for people not living there?
i guess that hasnt to do with it , its only because you are a poor opressed jew.
 

Back
Top Bottom