Truth and Logistics on Past, Present, and Future Middle Eastern events

[Tristen]

On 5/3/2024 at 6:51 AM, luigi said:

OK, I see what you are saying. I guess it's just Wikipedia and those thousands of other sites describing the Nakba where Israel evicted the Palestinians from what is currently Israel, have got it all wrong. 

Correct.

There are two narratives surrounding the "Nakba". There are many resources espousing the virtues of each narrative. The mainstream has adopted the narrative that incorrectly attributes Arab migration exclusively Israeli military intimidation.

In this thread, you have also been a proponent of this false narrative.

[Tristen]

On 5/3/2024 at 6:38 AM, Vine Abider said:

From my understanding, in 1948 Israelis and Arabs (aka Palestinians) were each invited to form their own nations.  Israel did so, and also invited any Arabs within their borders to be part of their country.  But the Arabs didn't form a nation, as they were offered, and then immediately attacked the Jews.  Is that accurate?

I'd say it's slightly more nuanced than your summary. I think the important 'highlights' are as follows:

- The British were given official stewardship of "The Palestinian Territory" in July 1920.

- Approaching this period of British mandate, as the result of Jewish immigration, the Arabs had become increasingly concerned and violent because of the changing demographics.

- The British solution to the conflict was a partition plan (Peel Commision 1937) that separated Jews from Arabs (with a stretch in between remaining under the control of Britain). The Jews didn't really give a universal, united response to this plan. The Arabs increased their violence in the land as a universal rejection of this plan.

- After WWII, Jews also became increasingly desperate and violent - due to displaced Jews now needing a place to go. Jews therefore also became violent against the British for limiting immigration to the land.

- In 1947, Britain asked the newly-formed UN to help provide a solution. The UN resolution for a two-state solution passed. Jews celebrated and Arabs increased their attacks on Jews.

- On the final day of the British Mandate (Friday, May 14th, 1948), Israel declared Independence at 4PM. Egyptian bombs fell on Tel Aviv around 4 hours later. The military forces of the surrounding Arab states mobilized against Israel the following day - starting a war that would last two years.

 

[Neighbor]

On 5/3/2024 at 5:53 AM, tatwo said:

We understand why that would require explanation.

 

Seems to me that at least one of the "we' was individually mistaken to suggest, or declare, that another is a judaizer. It was kind of funny though! Got a chuckle out of it anyway, went good with morning coffee and toast. 

[luigi]

 Micah chapters 2 and 3 describe what is Israel, violently killing people who are averse to war (Micah 2:8). As a result, the Lord is angry with those in power and abandons Israel for their sakes to be plowed under, in order to eliminate the chaff for their their unjust ways (Micah 3:12). Following this cleansing, Micah 4:1-8, then describes a future Israel (after their gathering from the 4 corners of the earth), becoming the foremost of large nations (Micah 4:1), where people from all the worlds nations will go to for enlightenment (Micah 4:2). Obviously, this time is when the Lord has commenced to reign. After this telling of what will be the future state of Israel and the worlds nations; Micah 4:9-13, then describes in retrospect, evicted Israel throughout the worlds nations as a woman in travail experiencing birth pangs, who upon bringing forth, is made strong in the Lord (Micah 4:13). Micah 5:1-3, then goes further in retrospect to describe why the Lord Jesus has given up His days on earth, until this time, when she that travaileth hath brought forth, and the remnant of His brethren are gathered together with Israel (Micah 5:3). As these events of the travailing woman and bringing forth correlate with the travailing woman in Revelation 12, which is during the reign of the beast; we can then realize that the unjust actions of current Israel in Micah 2 & 3, are precursory events to those in Micah 4 & 5, and Revelation 12. 

Micah 2:8 Even of late my people is risen up as an enemy: ye pull off the robe with the garment from them that pass by securely as men averse from war.

Micah 3:12 Therefore shall Zion for your sake be plowed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of the forest.

Micah 4:1 But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it.

 Micah 4:2 And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.

Micah 4:13 Arise and thresh, O daughter of Zion: for I will make thine horn iron, and I will make thy hoofs brass: and thou shalt beat in pieces many people: and I will consecrate their gain unto the Lord, and their substance unto the Lord of the whole earth.

Micah 5:3 Therefore will he give them up, until the time that she which travaileth hath brought forth: then the remnant of his brethren shall return unto the children of Israel.

[Vine Abider]

8 hours ago, Tristen said:

I'd say it's slightly more nuanced than your summary. I think the important 'highlights' are as follows:

- The British were given official stewardship of "The Palestinian Territory" in July 1920.

- Approaching this period of British mandate, as the result of Jewish immigration, the Arabs had become increasingly concerned and violent because of the changing demographics.

- The British solution to the conflict was a partition plan (Peel Commision 1937) that separated Jews from Arabs (with a stretch in between remaining under the control of Britain). The Jews didn't really give a universal, united response to this plan. The Arabs increased their violence in the land as a universal rejection of this plan.

- After WWII, Jews also became increasingly desperate and violent - due to displaced Jews now needing a place to go. Jews therefore also became violent against the British for limiting immigration to the land.

- In 1947, Britain asked the newly-formed UN to help provide a solution. The UN resolution for a two-state solution passed. Jews celebrated and Arabs increased their attacks on Jews.

- On the final day of the British Mandate (Friday, May 14th, 1948), Israel declared Independence at 4PM. Egyptian bombs fell on Tel Aviv around 4 hours later. The military forces of the surrounding Arab states mobilized against Israel the following day - starting a war that would last two years.

 

Great summary!  The makings of a grand conundrum . . .  Any ideas what the solution might look like?

[Tristen]

10 hours ago, Vine Abider said:

Great summary!  The makings of a grand conundrum . . .  Any ideas what the solution might look like?

Lol!

My prediction is that the spiritually blinded world will continue to align itself against Israel - and then God will ultimately intervene on Israel's behalf.

 

[Vine Abider]

13 hours ago, Tristen said:

Lol!

My prediction is that the spiritually blinded world will continue to align itself against Israel - and then God will ultimately intervene on Israel's behalf.

 

My eschatological view agrees, and this stage will give rise to the apparent "savior of the world."

[1to3]

The United nations did not originate in 1947, it commenced under League of Nations established on January 10, 1920   by the Paris Peace Conference.

The Covenant of the League of Nations was signed on 28 June 1919 as Part I of the Treaty of Versailles, and it became effective with the rest of the Treaty on 10 January 1920.

The main organization ceased operations on 18 April 1946 when many of its components were relocated into the new United Nations. As the template for modern global governance, the League profoundly shaped the modern world.

Was the Balfour declaration done legaly?

 

The Balfour Declaration, which resulted in a significant upheaval in the lives of Palestinians, was issued on November 2, 1917.

The declaration turned the Zionist aim of establishing a Jewish state in Palestine into a reality when Britain publicly pledged to establish “a national home for the Jewish people” there.

The pledge is generally viewed as one of the main catalysts of the Nakba – the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in 1948 – and the conflict that ensued with the Zionist state of Israel.

 

It is regarded as one of the most controversial and contested documents in the modern history of the Arab world and has puzzled historians for decades.

 

The Balfour Declaration (“Balfour’s promise” in Arabic) was a public pledge by Britain in 1917 declaring its aim to establish “a national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine.

The statement came in the form of a letter from Britain’s then-foreign secretary, Arthur Balfour, addressed to Lionel Walter Rothschild, a figurehead of the British Jewish community.

 

Was the Balfout declaration legal to enforce?

 

Journal of Levantine Studies Vol. 8 No. 1, Summer 2018, pp. 101-120Journal of Levantine StudiesVol. 7, No. 1, Summer 2017, pp. 9-34The Balfour Declaration in International Law

Introduction: Why Law Matters
The Balfour Declaration had enormous political significance, but did it have any
legal force? Was it legally binding, exposing Britain to legal remedies for its breach,
or was it merely an expression of policy that could be disregarded without legal
consequences? These questions are of intense interest to legal historians, but they
also have contemporary political relevance. The issue is not so much whether Britain
might be liable to the Palestinians for failing to safeguard the “civil and religious
rights” of non-Jewish residents of Palestine, though that is a theoretical possibility.
Instead, the question is whether the Declaration is legally relevant to the ongoing
peace process. The Declaration’s binding character matters because any negotiated
settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will take the form of a legal document,
and any such document will build on—indeed, be shaped by—the pre-existing legal
framework. If the Balfour Declaration is part of that legal framework, then a final
settlement to the conflict has to account for the legal obligations set forth in the
Declaration, at least in broad terms. The parties have routinely recited the most
prominent planks of the legal framework in their peace agreements. The Camp
David Accords and the first Oslo Accord, for example, both begin by invoking UN
Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.1
The legal framework is important in another way: it shapes the negotiation
process itself. Background legal norms set boundaries for the parties by describing
which negotiating positions are acceptable and which are beyond the pale. What is
more, the legal framework can define the political “center of gravity” of negotiations

https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2000&context=scholar

Question:

In Light of the secret  British documents, did Colonel T.E. Lawrence ( Laurence of Arabia) deceive the Hashemite Arabs to revolt against the Ottoman Empire?

 

[Marathoner]

The historical information is appreciated, @1to3. Accurate, and this reveals the proper frame of reference for current events. This conflict is not as ancient as some claim it to be. It started roughly 107 years ago.

I've recently learned the significance of the nation state of Israel to some and how their view is central to theology defined by a peculiar eschatological system. It always struck me as strange, but paying attention to these topics (more than one is ongoing) has helped me to understand. It's still strange of course, but now I'm finally getting it. 

[1to3]

 

It all becomes connected to their plan...

 

who created the Federal reserve?

Piatt Andrew, Henry Davison, Arthur Shelton, Frank Vanderlip and Paul Warburg – met at the Jekyll Island Club, off the coast of Georgia, to write a plan to reform the nation's banking system.

 

Who were the original members of the Jekyll Island Club?

 

 

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTgUDGq4RTNlfPrMhQ9kVlfq9oNXOGCZtoXZa2dreEdFA&s

 

In 1886, the island was purchased by the Jekyll Island Club, a turn-of-the century vacation resort patronized by the nation's leading families. Club Members included such prominent figures as J.P. Morgan, Joseph Pulitzer, William K. Vanderbilt, Marshall Field, and William Rockefeller.

 

The Federal Reserve does not own gold

Some say:Its not Federal and there is no Reserve. The institution that is the Federal Reserve operates independently from the US Federal goverment. It was created circa 1913 using federal legislation in a very nebulous and underhanded political manipulation by the uber wealthy of the day. It has not been audited as to its finances in a very long time, if ever. Using federal legislation ,The Federal Reserve does not own gold It has not been audited as to its finances in a very long time, if ever.

So while our US Federal Constitution specifically states that our money will be gold or silver coin, with minting controlled by the federal government, somehow this entity continues to exist. Perhaps the long history of banks making up their own debt instrument notes, and the power this gave them over finance and thus politicians, is responsible.

 

Is the federal reserve a ponsey skeme?

Anytime "money" (currency) comes into existence as a debt, then it requires more an

 

Hmmm...

What Is a Ponzi Scheme? Is Fractional Reserve Banking a Ponzi? Well, what are the characteristics of a Ponzi?

d more money to pay interest, otherwise it would soon all be in the hands of those charging the interest (banks). This is what makes inflation a REQUIREMENT, and thus more money (debt currency) must keep coming into the game or the game stops. = PONZI

or

Yes, and no. New bonds are issued all the time to cover expenditures of all kinds including P & I on maturing bonds, but a Ponzi scheme involves selling to new investors to pay off old ones and eventually running out of funds because not enough new investors can be found,

 

The Reserve Banks are decentralized by design and are located in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Richmond, Atlanta, Chicago, St. Louis, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Dallas, and San Francisco.

 

Do you have any answers?

 

 

Federal Reserve Banks' stock is owned by banks, never by individuals. Federal law requires national banks to be members of the Federal Reserve System and to own a specified amount of the stock of the Reserve Bank in the Federal Reserve district where they are located.

 

what do the Balfour declaration and the federal reserve have in common?

The Balfour declaration got going when Britain conquered Jerusalem in ww1 after signing the Balfour declaration in 1917

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

The reason why Israel exists. It's got little to nothing to do with the Holocaust and religion.

Israel was created after a conglomerate of bankers offered to help the UK win WW1 and then WW2, they did this with loans to US companies and more loans to the Soviets, once the war was won, twice, the British gave these shareholders the mandate of Palestine, which was agreed in the Balfour declaration.

We live in a debt based society, where Capital is owned and disseminated by private organisations, loosely attached to a government or independent of it.

The US dollar for example is owned and controlled by the Federal Reserve which is about as Federal as the Federal Express, it's a privately owned company with shareholders. The value of the dollar is derived from the fact that it is the currency used to settle international transactions for oil, which is why it's called "the Petrodollar". Petroleum is the lifeblood of any economy, either by obtaining it, or being able to sell it, the Nazi's learnt this the hard way, when they tried to win a war with coal and wood powered tanks at the end of WW2.

These privately owned financial institutions make money from loans, the more/bigger the loans a government makes, the more interest they can collect. This is why every nation has a "National Debt". In most cases the productivity of the nations citizens is used as the collateral for that debt. In the UK they need to have a "National Insurance Number" in order to work, because they are the Nation's Insurance against it's debt obligations.

Governments are in a position where they are unable to be independent from reliance on private financial creditors. The National Debt increases year on year, and with each new electorate, it only increases further to maintain their campaign promises.

However, if you're completely dependent on needing access to credit, have overbearing debt obligations that you're obliged to honor, or are reliant on the purchase/sale of hydrocarbons to run your economy, and then fhese financial institutions don't like you, then you're ***ked.For example, Saddam Hussain tried to sell Oil for Euro's instead of Dollars (the main difference being is that the European Central Bank is owned by a different bunch of shareholders than the Federal Reserve) and this upset the Federal Reserve, who loaned the US and UK government over $1 trillion to make sure that stops.

 

"Or what about Libya, Gaddafi wanted to create a gold backed Pan African currency similar to what the dollar used to be like before Nixon took the dollar off of the Gold standard. Not having a gold standard is great for institutions, because it means they can make even more loans without worrying about having enough gold as collateral for them. So the banks loaned loads of money to several Nato governments to make sure Gaddafi went bye bye too.

Because the most expensive thing a financial institution can loan money for, is war!

Ask yourself this, why has the entire globe seen less than 60 days of peace since the end of WW2?

Because tanks and planes cost more and have way less longevity than hospitals and schools. If you're a financial institution, you can approve the loans for weapons to destroy, the schools and hospitals, and once they're destroyed, you can then approve the loan to rebuild them.

You don't like it? Well no oil for you. War is the most profitable business when you live on a planet of debt slaves.

These institutions got their first taste of genocide for oil in the Native American oil Rich Midwest of the United States. When demand outstripped supply they needed other sources of black gold.

Iran and Saudi have already brokered a deal with China's help, this is all about OPEC threatening the petrodollar again.

The Banks still don't have total control of all the Capital despite controlling the institutions that facilitate the transactions.

These institutions are also on life support, because technology like Bitcoin could essentially make them redundant overnight, in a way that would be much more transparent, cheaper, faster, less reliant on war and debt, and make Capital weponisation or sanctions much more democratic and expensive.

Which is why they're now desperate to start WW3. Because war generates the most revenue in terms of interest on loans."