Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by natalia.medicine)
    The Jews also kicked the British out. Pretty much backstabbed then since the British wanted to support them.
    Apparently Britain failed to prove her good intentions. Maybe because they didn't exist. :cool:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by admonit)
    I'm speaking about the fact, not about somebody's belief or opinion. And the fact is that a very important political document regarding the Jewish people was addressed to the Zionist Federation.
    Which, in and of itself, has no impact on the question of who was authorised to speak for Jews in general.

    You have found it necessary to quote a ridiculous "hugely inflated belief in the power and influence of the Jews". I found it necessary to response.
    I mentioned it because it was related, and is a part of the historiography on the topic. I don't have Segev's book to hand, unfortunately, but there's a review here.

    Regarding Montagu, I've already said you that he, as a Jew, represented only himself with his slavish mentality.
    What exacty is this "slavish mentality"? Or is it just that he disagrees with your opinion.

    Yes, calls for unity with Syria were dropped, since the area became under French control. Still they wanted Palestine as a part of an independent Arab state.
    Exactly. The priority was independence. The precise borders of the independent state or states that resulted were of secondary importance.

    The analogy with Gran Colombia is wrong. These countries fought against Spanish rule from the beginning of the Spanish conquest.
    No they didn't, they didn't exist at the beginning of the Spanish conquest. They didn't start actually fighting against Spanish rule until the start of the 19th Century, when Spain had been taken over by Napoleon and was thus was too weak to repress them. Sure, there were occasional revolts in the preceding centuries, but in general these were of a somewhat different phenomenon (e.g. led by indigenous peoples rather than Criollos).

    Palestinian Arabs never did it and never tried to do it.
    There were Arab nationalist movements and revolts in the Ottoman empire, most notably the one in WW1 that helped end it, including in Palestine.

    Also Gran Colombia was a federation, and Palestinian Arabs wanted be just a part of an Arab state.
    I don't see why the internal structure matters, particularly given the fact that this hypothetical 'Greater Syria' including Palestine never actually manifested.

    What about the beginning of the clause?
    "Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone." Nothing was said about Palestine. Palestine mandate is defined by its content.
    I don't see how the extra seven words change anything. It doesn't say anything about Palestine specifically because it's referring to all three Class A mandates (it doesn't mention any of the others either).

    And as I asked before, on what basis do you claim the Palestinians were less 'prepared' for independence and self-government than the populations of Iraq and Syria when even the LoN (an organisation run, of course, by colonialist empires - and thus hardly likely to take a generous view of the political capacities of non-European peoples) placed them in the same category of 'preparedness'?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Epicurean)
    The Balfour Declaration in itself didn't cause half as much problems as French policy in Palestine. Why would the British alone be 'sued'? The British realised early on that mass immigration of Jews into Palestine would flare up tensions, and thus actually set strict quotas on the number of Jews who could enter Palestine. The French however assisted Jewish migrants to bypass British blockades and helped to establish mass immigration of Jews to Palestine. The French also helped arm rebel groups such as the Hagana in Palestine. And French support lasted until the 60's, and during that time, France was the largest supplier of arms to Israel. So if anyone is to be held liable for the mess that has occurred, France definitely should be.
    Fair point, though as the whole thing is symbolic anyway, it's the British who were at least nominally in charge of the region.

    I think he is referring to post-1967 Arab-Israeli war when anti-semitism in the Arab world was at its greatest. Many Jews were forced to leave countries such as Yemen and Iraq due to the deteriorating state of affairs.
    That's hard to sqaure with him referring to both Jews and Christians, and the fact that he places this before "The Jews kicked the Arabs out."
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by admonit)
    Apparently Britain failed to prove her good intentions. Maybe because they didn't exist. :cool:
    Britain arguably never had good intentions. The main focus was to secure the Suez Canal. And the British soon realised the detrimental effect of their policy on stability in the Arab world (which Britain also had an interest in). Britain never really had an interest in the Zionist cause.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Epicurean)
    Britain arguably never had good intentions. The main focus was to secure the Suez Canal. And the British soon realised the detrimental effect of their policy on stability in the Arab world (which Britain also had an interest in). Britain never really had an interest in the Zionist cause.
    I start thinking that I'm the only person here who understands my sarcasm.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by admonit)
    Apparently Britain failed to prove her good intentions. Maybe because they didn't exist. :cool:
    The Brits obviously knew the Jews would stab them in the back with the 7/7 bus bombings :sly:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by natalia.medicine)
    The Jews also kicked the British out. Pretty much backstabbed then since the British wanted to support them.
    You have a very poor knowledge of history. The British who had a mandate over the region chose to pass control over to the United Nations as they were unable to contain hostilities between the Arabs and the Jews.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    1917 is 2520 years after Nebuchadnezzar became sole ruler of Babylon ("the head of gold" - Daniel 2:38) and besieged Jerusalem, removing all but some poor Jews.
    So what? well, 2520 is 7 x 360, seven bible "times" ...

    "if you (Jews) will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins. And I will break the pride of your power" (Leviticus 26:18-19)

    "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled" (Jesus in Luke 21:24)

    Note only the year but the day:
    "Consider now from this day and upward, from the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, even from the day that the foundation of the Lord's temple was laid, consider it." (Haggai 2:18)

    The ninth month in the Hebrew calendar is Kislev - corresponding to part of November-December in the Christian calendar, in 1917, this fell on the 9th December.

    And the method:
    "As birds flying, so will the Lord of hosts defend Jerusalem; defending also he will deliver it; and passing over he will preserve it" (Isaiah 31:5)

    The city was occupied by the Turkish army - situation 04/12/17:
    Name:  4 12 17.jpg
Views: 36
Size:  141.3 KB

    but from the 7th December, 14th Bomber Squadron (which as an arabic motto "I spread my wings and keep my promise") flew a number of sorties over Jerusalem (in "V" formation, like birds) at such a low altitude as to convince the Turkish soldiers that its bombs would bring down the stone buildings upon them.

    No other squadron could fly because of the miserable weather, the planes had to be pushed to the top of a hill and flown down the hill to get enough momentum to be able to take off because of the muddy conditions. The Turks became so thoroughly demoralised that they began to evacuate the city without waiting for orders. By the end of the next day, the city was nearly free of the enemy, but Turkish artillery had been concentrated north and west of Jerusalem. Ammunition was being brought up with the intention of shelling the city when the 14th Bomber Squadron began to destroy the batteries with such accuracy that the gunners fled in panic.
    So, the city was delivered on 9th Decemver without any damage!

    Daniel, writing from Babylon, also said "Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days" (12:11). "Days" are years in prophecy and 1917 is 1335 on the Moslem calendayr, as shown on coins with bioth dates issued at the time because of the presence of many westerners.

    50 years later (a "jubilee") saw further liberation and many prophecy watchers think that something significant will happen at the next one, next year.

    Britain did not annex the conquered territory, but administered it under mandate from the League of Nations until the 15th May, 1948, when British forces were withdrawn, administration having become impossible as the result of terrorist action by Jewish fanatics.
    Jerusalem is said to be "a cup of trembling unto all the people round about" and "a burdensome stone for all people" (Zechariah 12:2, 3)

    Yes, Israel became a nation in 1948, the "fig tree" shot forth, like many other nations (trees) became independent, but remember the fig tree that had no good fruit was cursed ...

    "Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; When they now shoot forth, you see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. So likewise you, when you see these things come to pass, know that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand." (Luke 21:29-31)
    Attached Images
      
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NJA)
    Yes, Israel became a nation in 1948, the "fig tree" shot forth, like many other nations (trees) became independent, but remember the fig tree that had no good fruit was cursed ...
    Error, dude. It was done according to the Moses's promise:

    1. And it will be, when all these things come upon you the blessing and the curse which I have set before you that you will consider in your heart, among all the nations where the Lord your God has banished you,
    2. and you will return to the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul, and you will listen to His voice according to all that I am commanding you this day you and your children,
    3. then, the Lord, your God, will bring back your exiles, and He will have mercy upon you. He will once again gather you from all the nations, where the Lord, your God, had dispersed you.
    4. Even if your exiles are at the end of the heavens, the Lord, your God, will gather you from there, and He will take you from there.
    5. And the Lord, your God, will bring you to the land which your forefathers possessed, and you will take possession of it, and He will do good to you, and He will make you more numerous than your forefathers.

    Deuteronomy 30:1-5
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by admonit)
    ...Deuteronomy 30:1-5
    That too, the Old Testament promises can be obtained but personal salvation is according to the New Covenant that Jesus instituted.

    Note it says " all that I (Moses) am commanding you this day"

    Moses wasn't telling them to be born again.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NJA)
    That too, the Old Testament promises can be obtained but personal salvation is according to the New Covenant that Jesus instituted.

    Note it says " all that I (Moses) am commanding you this day"

    Moses wasn't telling them to be born again.
    Moses is a great Jewish prophet and his prophecy is very clear. What said or didn't say Jesus is irrelevant for Jews.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by admonit)
    Moses is a great Jewish prophet and his prophecy is very clear. What said or didn't say Jesus is irrelevant for Jews.
    Personally, I wouldn't focus one one thing that suits my personal/political agenda and say other promises are "irrelevant". There are prophecies of a Messiah, Daniel 9:25-27 pinpoints the year of his arrival, "cutting off"
    and what he would achieve.

    Moses also said "I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like you, and will put my words
    in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
    And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name,
    I will require it of him" (Deuteronomy 18:18-19)


    Focusing on the land of Israel is like Jonah taking comfort from the plant that gave him pale shelter (4v6)
    while he missed the big picture.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NJA)
    Personally, I wouldn't focus one one thing that suits my personal/political agenda and say other promises are "irrelevant".
    It's not agenda, it's actually the topic of the thread - creation of Jewish state. It was your idea to consider it from religious point of view. And I never said that "other promises are irrelevant"
    There are prophecies of a Messiah, Daniel 9:25-27 pinpoints the year of his arrival, "cutting off"
    and what he would achieve.
    You have to options:
    1. Jews are exclusively stupid people and during 3000 years were unable to understand what is written in their scripts in their language.
    2. Jewish conspiracy theory.
    Both options are bad.
    Moses also said "I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like you, and will put my words
    in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
    And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name,
    I will require it of him" (Deuteronomy 18:18-19)
    Do you know that Muslims use the same verses to prove the legitimacy of prophet Muhammad?
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.