I_C_Weener: C'mon, Cortez personally offed 25 million Aztecs. That entitles someone to land, right?

according to zionist logic, yes

Out of curiosity, does a 500 year old one do so?

if the zionist are "right" then native americans have a more recent claim to "homeland" than anyone else, how many americans supporting zionism are prepared to give up their suburbia to the native americans?

Tatsuma:

Here is another report:(p)

John J. Mearsheimer, a professor of political science and a co-director of the Program on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago, and Stephen M. Walt, academic dean of the Kennedy School, also allege that the Israeli lobby in the US, particularly the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), has helped exaggerate the importance of making the protection of Israel a key part of US foreign policy.

bake420: fine from now on i will state that a 3300 story DOES NOT make for a land deed in 1948.

You're right, it doesn't. The fact that Jews always lived on that Land, that the Balfour plan was created to permit Jews to build their own state and that the UN voted for Israel to be created, however, does make a land deed in 1948

If racism is bad...

And the KKK is racist...

Then the KKK is bad...

And if Duke was LEADER of the KKK...

Then Duke is bad...

And if Wolf Blitzer asks Duke what his response is when people say he's a racist man who led a racist group who is now going to a racist conference, and then lets Duke speak more than he does...

Then Wolf Blitzer is bad because his questions are merely tools of the evil elite.

/Duke sucks
//Stop trying to defend racism
///Still Blitzer could have wrapped it up without the bullshiat satellite comment. How about "That's all the time we have".

consdubya:

Way to make it too easy once again

Tatsuma: The New Anti-Semitism

Historian Robert Wistrich argues that "left-leaning Judeophobes ... never call themselves 'anti-Semitic.' Indeed, they are usually indignant at the very suggestion that they have anything against Jews. Such denials notwithstanding, they are usually obsessed with stigmatizing Israel ..." Wistrich adds that not all criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic - his checklist to identify the "anti-Semitic wolf in anti-Israeli sheep's clothing" includes the singling-out by writers of the "Jewish lobby" or the "Jewish vote"; complaining about Jewish solidarity with Israel; gratuitous emphasis on Jewish wealth or alleged Jewish control of the media; calls for economic boycotts directed exclusively against Israeli products and academic institutions; and the assertion that Jews reject all criticism as anti-Semitic

We can add these two from this thread alone

consdubya: Israel claims to speak for jews, and more jews need to speak out against the horrible treatment of the palestinians.

Israeli lobby

I_C_Weener

When people routinely bring up the Conquest of the Americas here,
they routinely forget to mention Small Pox.

Cortez was aided by surrounding polities that, basically hated the Aztecs, but he was also aided some with Small pox - definitely later after the initial conquest. Cortes was also good at diplomacy and establishing a coalition.

see
Conquest: Montezuma, Cortés, and the Fall of Old México

Also see
Link
When the Europeans arrived, carrying germs which thrived in dense, semi-urban populations, the indigenous people of the Americas were effectively doomed. They had never experienced smallpox, measles or flu before, and the viruses tore through the continent, killing an estimated 90% of Native Americans.

Smallpox is believed to have arrived in the Americas in 1520 on a Spanish ship sailing from Cuba, carried by an infected African slave. As soon as the party landed in Mexico, the infection began its deadly voyage through the continent. Even before the arrival of Pizarro, smallpox had already devastated the Inca Empire, killing the Emperor Huayna Capac and unleashing a bitter civil war that distracted and weakened his successor, Atahuallpa.

I_C_Weener: United Nations recognition?

that is grand....so let's accept the UN when it suits our needs, but call it a bunch of a-holes when it does anything else

/this is not directed at you personally,(unless it applies), but in general, i see people railing against the UN more than getting behind it (lets not forget that isreal is in violation of multiple UN resolutions)

Tatsuma: that the UN voted for Israel to be created,

and what about israel being in violation of UN resolutions...or is the UN only valid when it supports your argument?

consdubya
I do not hate Jews

and

If you and people like you keep up acting the way you are, you, and unfortunately your entire people, might be asked to hit the showers again very soon

That sir, is like saying I don't hate the blacks, but goddamned if everyone one of those darkies gonna need to die. It's about the most anti-Semetic thing I've read here on Fark.

bake420
there are people in this world, myself included, who believe zionism is the cause of many problems in this world.

And that's just an irrational thing to believe. If Israel vanished tomorrow, exactly what in the world would mystically unfark itself? The Palestineans? The Middle East? Africa? South America? The stock market? The answer is not a damned thing. If you really think Zionism is the cause of 'many of the world's problems' you either:
A. Have an really really poor understanding of the problems in the world, or
B. Are too mentally lazy to think things through and pick one conveniant issue to throw the world's problems upon.

Just like someone telling us that 'Jews started all the wars'.

I_C_Weener: And per your logic, Mexico shoudl be returned to the Aztecs?

where are you getting this????

speak directly, what are you trying to say??

i said zionism is wrong (making 3000 yo land claims), and you are telling me i say mexico should be back to the aztecs????

Tatsuma: You've shown everyone in this thread so far that you are indeed an anti-semite. Cherish this moment, because I rarely call people like that. It's for very special people and you qualified!

Hahahahahahaha! You never accuse people of being anti-semetic....... sure.

You are a lying bag of dirt, and I say that on a personal basis. Call me what you want, if it makes you feel better about supporting war crimes, I dont really care what you think.

I hope people do take time to consider what parts of the jewish religion are not compatible with a global world, just like they should reconsider Islam and Christianity.

bake420: and what about israel being in violation of UN resolutions...or is the UN only valid when it supports your argument?

Most of the UN resolutions against Israel are jokes.

Resolution 231: The UN condemns Israel's declaration they will hold a parade in Jerusalem
Resolution 232: The UN condemns Israel's preparations to hold a parade in Jerusalem
Resolution 233: The UN urges Israel not to hold a parade in Jerusalem
Resolution 234: The UN condemns Israel's parade in Jerusalem

You should learn the difference between General Assembly and Security Council resolutions

Kaeishiwaza: If Israel vanished tomorrow

if israel were not majcally created in 1948 you would not have 90% of the mid east conflict

jew eat?

awed by the power of Tatsuma to battle 5 trolls at once.

(hey Tatsuma, they are trolls)

Tatsuma: Way to make it too easy once again


Dude, I dont give a rats ass if some zionist professor accuses me of something.

What about the report I linked to?

Ignoring that? You dishonest scumbag?

Tatsuma

When referring to balfour and the Jewish State,

Make sure to add this important caveat. These definitions changed with the Mandate, mainly because the British and the Jews overlooked the concomitant national desires of hundreds of thousands of people who lived there.

1939 white paper

The Royal Commission and previous commissions of Enquiry have drawn attention to the ambiguity of certain expressions in the Mandate, such as the expression `a national home for the Jewish people', and they have found in this ambiguity and the resulting uncertainty as to the objectives of policy a fundamental cause of unrest and hostility between Arabs and Jews. His Majesty's Government are convinced that in the interests of the peace and well being of the whole people of Palestine a clear definition of policy and objectives is essential. The proposal of partition recommended by the Royal Commission would have afforded such clarity, but the establishment of self supporting independent Arab and Jewish States within Palestine has been found to be impracticable. It has therefore been necessary for His Majesty's Government to devise an alternative policy which will, consistent with their obligations to Arabs and Jews, meet the needs of the situation in Palestine. Their views and proposals are set forth below under three heads, Section I, "The Constitution", Section II. Immigration and Section III. Land.
Section I. "The Constitution"

It has been urged that the expression "a national home for the Jewish people" offered a prospect that Palestine might in due course become a Jewish State or Commonwealth. His Majesty's Government do not wish to contest the view, which was expressed by the Royal Commission, that the Zionist leaders at the time of the issue of the Balfour Declaration recognised that an ultimate Jewish State was not precluded by the terms of the Declaration. But, with the Royal Commission, His Majesty's Government believe that the framers of the Mandate in which the Balfour Declaration was embodied could not have intended that Palestine should be converted into a Jewish State against the will of the Arab population of the country. That Palestine was not to be converted into a Jewish State might be held to be implied in the passage from the Command Paper of 1922 which reads as follows

"Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that `Palestine is to become as Jewish as England is English.' His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated .... the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the (Balfour) Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded IN PALESTINE."

But this statement has not removed doubts, and His Majesty's Government therefore now declare unequivocally that it is not part of their policy that Palestine should become a Jewish State. They would indeed regard it as contrary to their obligations to the Arabs under the Mandate, as well as to the assurances which have been given to the Arab people in the past, that the Arab population of Palestine should be made the subjects of a Jewish State against their will.

consdubya: Hahahahahahaha! You never accuse people of being anti-semetic....... sure.

I said rarely. Look up this whole thread, you're the only one I called one and quite a few people made anti-Jewish comments

You are a lying bag of dirt, and I say that on a personal basis. Call me what you want, if it makes you feel better about supporting war crimes, I dont really care what you think.

Considering everyone is joining me in your condemnation and no one is defending you sand saying I'm jumping the shark, I've got to say it's fairly accurate to call you a Jew-hater

I hope people do take time to consider what parts of the jewish religion are not compatible with a global world, just like they should reconsider Islam and Christianity.

Nowhere did you condemn Judaism in your little diatribe, nor did you point out what was wrong with it, you kept attacking Jews

bake420: i said zionism is wrong (making 3000 yo land claims), and you are telling me i say mexico should be back to the aztecs????

Zionism is the belief that Jews have a right to a homeland and it changed into the belief that Israel has a right to exist.

Tatsuma: You should learn the difference between General Assembly and Security Council resolutions


Way to mention US vetos!

You intellectually dishonest slut.

/Trying to get banned now so I dont waste my entire weekend on this crap
//36, beach and the 3rd ashes test for me!

Israel is heading down the apartheid road and has been for some time, it has no choice if it wants to keep the west bank, and the number of settlers ending up on the West Bank clearly show Israel intentions.
The problem is Israel wants to be a Jewish state, how can it annex the West bank and take in all those Palestinians?
It cannot. So it must either give back the West Bank or somehow disenfranchise the Palestinians.
This is what Israel is doing. Creating tiny homelands for the natives. Google "Bantustans"
This is classic Apartheid.

What do people who lived through apartheid think? They would know...



South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu has accused Israel of practising apartheid in its policies towards the Palestinians.
The Nobel peace laureate said he was "very deeply distressed" by a visit to the Holy Land, adding that "it reminded me so much of what happened to us black people in South Africa".

"the humiliation of the Palestinians at checkpoints and roadblocks, suffering like us when young white police officers prevented us from moving about".
The archbishop, who was a leading opponent of apartheid in South Africa, said Israel would "never get true security and safety through oppressing another people".
Archbishop Tutu said his criticism of the Israeli Government did not mean he was anti-Semitic.
The archbishop attacked the political power of Jewish groups in the United States, saying: "People are scared in this country, to say wrong is wrong because the Jewish lobby is powerful - very powerful. Well, so what?
"The apartheid government was very powerful, but today it no longer exists.
"Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Pinochet, Milosevic, and Idi Amin were all powerful, but in the end they bit the dust," he said.
Speaking at a conference called Ending the Oppression in Boston, Archbishop Tutu told delegates Jewish people had been at the forefront of the struggle against apartheid in South Africa.
He asked: "Have our Jewish sisters and brothers forgotten their humiliation? Have they forgotten the collective punishment, the home demolitions, in their own history so soon?
"Have they turned their backs on their profound and noble religious traditions?"
The archbishop said that while he condemned suicide bombings by Palestinian militants against Israel, Israeli military action would not bring security to the Jewish state.
Israel must "strive for peace based on justice, based on withdrawal from all the occupied territories, and the establishment of a viable Palestinian state on those territories side by side with Israel, both with secure borders," he said.



I wonder what Ghandi would think...Pity he's not around...how about his grandson who lived in SA

Arun Gandhi, whose grandfather helped end British control over the Indian subcontinent, proposed to the Palestinian Parliament a peaceful march of 50,000 refugees across the Jordan River and said MPs should lead the way.
"What would happen? Maybe the Israeli army would shoot and kill several. They may kill 100. They may kill 200 men, women and children. And that would shock the world. The world will get up and say, 'What is going on?' " he said.
Mr Gandhi compared Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza with the treatment of blacks under South Africa's white minority regime, saying Palestinians' fate was "10 times worse".

What is Mandelas opinion?




" We identify with the PLO because, just like ourselves, they are fighting for the right of self-determination. I support Israel's right to exist, but that doesn't mean that Israel has the right to retain the territories they conquered from the Arab world."

"Israel should withdraw from all the areas which it won from the Arabs in 1967, and in particular Israel should withdraw completely from the Golan Heights, from south Lebanon and from the West Bank."

Following his release from prison in 1990, Mandela said, "Almost every country in the world -- except Israel" had invited him to visit.
Israel's invitation came only in 1994, but then the peace process did not make a visit politic. However, he now decided to show a spirit of forgiveness and reconciliation.
"To the many people who have questioned why I came, I say: Israel worked very closely with the apartheid regime. I say: I've made peace with many men who slaughtered our people like animals. Israel cooperated with the apartheid regime, but it did not participate in any atrocities," he said.



During February, signs like these were erected throughout the West Bank.

Welcome to the Az-Za'ayyem / Adumim crossing-point. The crossing-point is intended for use by Israelis only. It is prohibited for a non-Israeli person to cross or to be transported across this crossing-point!!
"Israeli" - a resident of Israel, whose place of residence is in the region and is an Israeli citizen, or a person who is entitled to immigrate to Israel pursuant to the Law of Return - 1950 as it is applied in Israel, or a person who is not a resident of the region but holds a valid entry permit to Israel."

bake420: if israel were not majcally created in 1948 you would not have 90% of the mid east conflict

Yeah, you're right!

The Iran-Iraq war was because of Israel!
The Iraq-Kuwait war was because of Israel!
The clashes between Syrian and Lebanese forces was because of Israel!
The US-Afghanistan war was because of Israel!
The US-Iraq war was because of Israel!

You make perfect sense! Is Mel "The Jews Start All the Wars" Gibson your history teacher?

EdMon: awed by the power of Tatsuma to battle 5 trolls at once.

cheers!

(hey Tatsuma, they are trolls)

It's either that or being hung over

Tatsuma: You should learn the difference between General Assembly and Security Council resolutions

so the fact that they are still occupying land from the 6 days war inviolation of UN resolution is a joke?

237 14 June 1967 Calls upon the Government of Israel to ensure the safety, welfare and security of the inhabitants, facilitate the return of those inhabitants who have fled the areas since the outbreak of the hostilities and recommends the scrupulous respect of the humanitarian principles contained in the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949.

242 22 Nov 1967 Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include: withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict; and termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.

I_C_Weener: My belief is that they are there now...deal with it.

then let them deal with it. sink or swim, it is not the US's fight PERIOD

Party Boy: Make sure to add this important caveat. These definitions changed with the Mandate, mainly because the British and the Jews overlooked the concomitant national desires of hundreds of thousands of people who lived there.

Uh, no.

The White Paper came because of Arab pressure that objected to a Jewish State and the British were in bed with them

Tatsuma: Considering everyone is joining me in your condemnation and no one is defending you sand saying I'm jumping the shark, I've got to say it's fairly accurate to call you a Jew-hater

The current participants are quite irrelevant to the discussion between me and you. You know what other people think of you......

Nowhere did you condemn Judaism in your little diatribe, nor did you point out what was wrong with it, you kept attacking Jews

Stop lying you cock pilot. Read it all again. With the mindset that I do not hate jews. Then you will understand. That is if you are able to even pretend you think I dont hate jews.

Ahh, No Gandhi!1

/broken record

bake420
If israel were not majcally created in 1948 you would not have 90% of the mid east conflict

If thinking that gets you to sleep at night, more power to you and your blanket of ignorance. Obviously that whole Shiite-Sunni thing, the Cold War meddling and Islamic Fundamentalism would have just disappeared without Israel. What nonsense. Did the creation of Israel decrease the stability of the Middle East? Certainly. Was it already an unstable place? You betcha. Would it still be an unstable, violent and underdeveloped area without Israel? Absolutetly. Arabs and Persians have killed each other at a vastly superior rate than their losses in the Israelis conflicts.

Jeez man, read a history book.

I_C_Weener: It works both ways.

oh, they are created, undeniably, do i personally agree with it, no, based on my religious (or lack there of) beliefs. but my argument come from the fact that israel wants support from the rest of the world for their beliefs...if you want it do it yourself, dont use my money or families life to support your religions tenets

bake420: so the fact that they are still occupying land from the 6 days war inviolation of UN resolution is a joke?

A) The Green Line wasn't a definitive border
B) The resolution, in French, didn't call for a complete and total retreat of the Israeli forces

Whatever. I'm sure our (US) current policies toward the Middle East are the correct ones, and will result in a lasting peace and security for America and the region.

Late to the party here - couldn't watch the video at work. Some thoughts.

1. Props to Wolf for keeping his cool and staying on topic. Nice back hand with the "If we're Zionist-controled, then why did we invite you on" question.

2. So Duke claims Isreal fed us bad info that lead us into the Iraq war? I thought some of the more damning evidence came from some guy in Messopotamia nick-named "Curve Ball?" And would the people reading the info still need to verify what they read and judge whether or not it was sound? Whatever the ethnicity of the info giver, you can't totally blame them for what our leaders decided to do with it.

3. WOW, did Duke tap-dance around the Holocaust question. It only required a Yes or No response and he went on about people being locked up for claiming it didn't really happen. I'd like to learn more about some of these cases - were they locked up ONLY for expressing their opinion or is there more Duke is leaving out? I know there was a guy in England (can't remember his name, sorry) who sued an American historian for taking him to task for denying the Holocaust, and the British courts found in her favor and, because he brought what amounted to a frivilous lawsuit, HE had to foot the bill for both sides! I kinda like that - it sure would cool the jets of the more letigious (sp?) types.

Kaeishiwaza: Arabs and Persians have killed each other

without US citizens dying!!!

fark em, let em all kill each other
but dont involve my family and money because of some 3300 yo story

Tatsuma
1) My statement is supported by several sources listed at 02:36:55 AM

2) Your statement needs clarification of "in bed." the statement is also easily turned around to link the many Zionist-British connections.

Frankly I fail to see how any of that is a rebuttal

Tatsuma: A) The Green Line wasn't a definitive border
B) The resolution, in French, didn't call for a complete and total retreat of the Israeli forces

so go over their and take the place of some US soldier Tat

consdubya: The current participants are quite irrelevant to the discussion between me and you. You know what other people think of you......

It is completely relevant. I'm not the only one to see these comments as anti-semitic, so you can't play the "you're paranoid and making a martyr out of yourself" card

Stop lying you cock pilot. Read it all again. With the mindset that I do not hate jews. Then you will understand. That is if you are able to even pretend you think I dont hate jews.

Oh please. Again, I've quoted it times and times again.

bake420:

I love how you completly ignored my total destruction of "Jews are the cause of all wars (in the Middle-East)!" argument

Tatsuma: I love how you completly ignored

missed, not ignored, i will go look for it, if you ahvent notices, mutiple conversations here

Wow. We really are off topic.

So, if we're gonna talk about the creation of the state of Israel, why don't we talk about Irgun and their actions between 1931 to 1948.

Were they wrong or not?

consdubya
Stop lying you cock pilot.

You say that like it would be a bad thing. You hate teh gheys too? You really fail at life and internets.

Tatsuma

"and the assertion that Jews reject all criticism as anti-Semitic"


But you cannot rule out that this does occur similiar to how reverse racism is taking place. Some Jews DO blatantly dismiss contructive criticism about Zionism as being anti-semitic to amplify empathy towards them.

The are over sensitive Jews too.

Ah, the Holidays! The smell of fresh-baked cookies is in the air, the sound of carolers carries on the wind, and the bat-shaite crazy is in full bloom.

Happy Soltice-based Hannu-Jesu Yes Religion Still Sucksmas everyone!

bake420: so go over their and take the place of some US soldier Tat

I'm sorry, there are US soldiers currently dying in Israel, Gaza or Judea and Samaria?

Party Boy: Frankly I fail to see how any of that is a rebuttal

It wasn't, I was mentionning that it had to do with oil interests rather than humanitarian one

The British (with the extension o the Empire) never had a humanitarian interest in no one except themselves

And as for the Holocaust, as we've discussed before...

A. I haven't seen the evidence, but then I don't feel like I have to. The alleged crimes against the Jews fit the profile for a pathetic species like "humanity" which all too willingly scapegoats one another. And who cares if it's 3 million or 6 million. One is too many.

B. The war on terror is racist. Shrugging off collateral damage seems to be the order of the day for some "dirka dirka" mocking racists who don't believe that Muslims are human beings.

C. Islamic fundamentalism is insane, and is stoked by American/Israeli policies. The only way to combat this insanity is with applied sanity and robust philosophical arguments.

Tatsuma: The Iran-Iraq war was because of Israel!
The Iraq-Kuwait war was because of Israel!
The clashes between Syrian and Lebanese forces was because of Israel!
The US-Afghanistan war was because of Israel!
The US-Iraq war was because of Israel!

when did i say this???
NEVER would be the answer

if you want an idea of where i am pulling 90% from, it would be the casualties caused by the creation of israel. so my bad, 90% of death and destruction would be a better descriptor

I'm Jewish.

Sorry for the Iraq war everyone.

My bad.

From
Link
The London Conference, 1939

To discuss alternatives, a round-table conference in London was held to which the British Government invited representatives of Palestinians (excluding those held responsible for violence), Jews (who could select whichever representatives they wished) and Arab States. If the Conference could not produce an agreement, the British Government announced, it would decide and implement its own policy.

The London Conference turned out to be parallel but separate Anglo-Arab and Anglo-Jewish conferences in February-March 1939, since the Arabs refused to formally recognize the Jewish Agency. All the independent Arab States participated: Egypt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Transjordan and the Yemen. It was for this conference, which reached to the roots of the Palestine issue, that the British Government made public the Husain-McMahon correspondence, which was examined by the Anglo-Arab Committee.

The Arabs were determined to secure the inherent right of the Palestinians to their independence, which had been pledged 20 years earlier and for which the Palestinians had risen up in arms. The Jews, backed by the Balfour Declaration and its incorporation in the Mandate, were determined to achieve a Jewish State, particularly at a time when Nazi persecution of Jewry in Europe was inflicting its notorious excesses and his people were facing what Dr. Weizmann described as "this, the blackest hour of Jewish history". Although meetings between all three sides took place towards the end of the London Conference, British proposals for an agreement were first rejected by the Jewish side and, after revision to partially meet the Jewish objections, by both sides.

The "MacDonald White Paper"

The end of this attempt to reach an agreement left the British Government facing the situation which its policies of two decades had created in Palestine, and now it presented its unilateral policy. A new White Paper was issued in May 1939, disclaiming any intention to create a Jewish State, rejecting Arab demands that Palestine become independent as an Arab State, and envisaging the termination of the mandate by 1949 with independence for Palestine in which both Palestinians and Jews would share in government. Immigration would end, after the admission of 75,000 new immigrants over the first five years. The Government would strictly regulate transfer of land.

Important excerpts from this last major British policy statement on Palestine before the Second World War deserve note:

"... His Majesty's Government do not read either the Statement of Policy of 1922 or the letter of 1931 as implying that the Mandate requires them, for all time and in all circumstances, to facilitate the immigration of Jews into Palestine subject only to consideration of the country's economic absorptive capacity. Nor do they find anything in the Mandate or in subsequent Statements of Policy to support the view that the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine cannot be effected unless immigration is allowed to continue indefinitely. If immigration has an adverse effect on the economic position in the country, it should clearly be restricted; and, equally, if it has a seriously damaging effect on the political position in the country, that is a factor that should not be ignored ... it cannot be denied that fear of indefinite Jewish immigration is widespread amongst the Arab population and that this fear has made possible disturbances which have given a serious setback to economic progress, depleted the Palestine exchequer, rendered life and property insecure, and produced a bitterness between the Arab and Jewish populations which is deplorable between citizens of the same country. If in these circumstances immigration is continued up to the economic absorptive capacity of the country, regardless of all other considerations, a fatal enmity between the two peoples will be perpetuated, and the situation in Palestine may become a permanent source of friction amongst all peoples in the Near and Middle East ...

"... His Majesty's Government are convinced that in the interests of the peace and well-being of the whole people of Palestine, a clear definition of policy and objectives is essential. The proposal of participation recommended by the Royal Commission would have afforded such clarity, but the establishment of self-supporting independent Arab and Jewish States within Palestine has been found to be impracticable. It has therefore been necessary for His Majesty's Government to devise an alternative policy which will, consistently with their obligations to Arabs and Jews, meet the needs of the situation in Palestine ...

"... It has been urged that the expression 'a national home for the Jewish people' offered a prospect that Palestine might in due course become a Jewish State or Commonwealth. His Majesty's Government do not wish to contest the view, which has been expressed by the Royal Commission, that the Zionist leaders at the time of the issue of the Balfour Declaration recognized that an ultimate Jewish State was not precluded by the terms of the Declaration. But, with the Royal Commission, His Majesty's Government believe that the framers of the Mandate in which the Balfour Declaration was embodied could not have intended that Palestine should be converted into a Jewish State against the will of the Arab population of the country ...

"... and His Majesty's Government therefore now declare unequivocally that it is not part of their policy that Palestine should become a Jewish State. They would indeed regard it as contrary to their obligations to the Arabs under the Mandate, as well as to the assurances which have been given to the Arab people in the past, that the Arab population of Palestine should be made the subjects of a Jewish State against their will ..." 109/

"... The objective of His Majesty's Government is the establishment within 10 years of an independent Palestine State in ... treaty relations with the United Kingdom.

"... the independent State should be one in which Arabs and Jews share in government in such a way as to ensure that the essential interests of each community are safeguarded ..." 109/
After two decades of Mandatory rule and colonization from abroad, the inherent rights of the Palestinians finally had been acknowledged. But the independence now being pledged was to a country where population and land patterns had been so transformed while it had been a territory under a League of Nations mandate, that the road to independence was full of pits and obstructions. For the Zionist movement the White Paper was a severe setback to their plans, and a new strategy was to be devised outside the framework of the Mandate of the League of Nations which, in any event, was nearing its end.

Tatsuma: What? there is an historical Israel, there never was an independant Palestine

Well, that is just dumb. Since when did historical become an opposite of independent? There most certainly was an historical Palestine. Independence has nothing to do with existence. Formal recognition of a country is a modern convention, so my point stands.

If you want to get snooty about ancient historical ownership, the region belongs to the Egyptians.