Why History Matters: The 1967 Six-Day War

Mention the word "history" and it can trigger a roll of the eyes.Add "Middle East" to the equation and folks might start running for the hills, unwilling to get caught up in the seemingly bottomless pit of details and disputes. But without an understanding of what happened, it's impossible to grasp where we are -- and where we are has profound relevance for the region and the world. Forty-eight years ago this week, the Six-Day War broke out. While some wars fade into obscurity, this one remains as relevant today as in 1967. Many of its core issues remain unresolved and in the news.Politicians, diplomats, and journalists continue to grapple with the consequences of that war, but rarely provide context. Yet without context, some critically important things may not make sense.

First, in June 1967, there was no state of Palestine. It didn't exist and never had. Its creation, proposed by the UN in 1947, was rejected by the Arab world because it also meant the establishment of a Jewish state alongside.

Second, the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem were in Jordanian hands. Violating solemn agreements, Jordan denied Jews access to their holiest places in eastern Jerusalem. To make matters still worse, they desecrated and destroyed many of those sites.Meanwhile, the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control, with harsh military rule imposed on local residents. And the Golan Heights, which were regularly used to shell Israeli communities far below, belonged to Syria.

Third, the Arab world could have created a Palestinian state in the West Bank, eastern Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip any day of the week. They didn't. There wasn't even discussion about it. And Arab leaders, who today profess such attachment to eastern Jerusalem, rarely, if ever, visited. It was viewed as an Arab backwater.

Fourth, the 1967 boundary at the time of the war, so much in the news these days, was nothing more than an armistice line dating back to 1949 -- familiarly known as the Green Line. That's after five Arab armies attacked Israel in 1948 with the aim of destroying the embryonic Jewish state. They failed. Armistice lines were drawn, but they weren't formal borders. They couldn't be. The Arab world, even in defeat, refused to recognize Israel's very right to exist.

Fifth, the PLO, which supported the war effort, was established in 1964, three years before the conflict erupted. That's important because it was created with the goal of obliterating Israel. Remember that in 1964 the only "settlements" were Israel itself.

Sixth, in the weeks leading up to the Six-Day War, Egyptian and Syrian leaders repeatedly declared that war was coming and their objective was to wipe Israel off the map. There was no ambiguity. Twenty-two years after the Holocaust, another enemy spoke about the extermination of Jews. The record is well-documented.
The record is equally well-documented that Israel, in the days leading up to the war, passed word to Jordan, via the UN and United States, urging Amman to stay out of any pending conflict. Jordan's King Hussein ignored the Israeli plea and tied his fate to Egypt and Syria. His forces were defeated by Israel, and he lost control of the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem. He later acknowledged that he had made a terrible error in entering the war.

Seventh, Egypt's President Gamal Abdel Nasser demanded that UN peacekeeping forces in the area, in place for the previous decade to prevent conflict, be removed. Shamefully, without even the courtesy of consulting Israel, the UN complied. That left no buffer between Arab armies being mobilized and deployed and Israeli forces in a country one-fiftieth the size of Egypt -- and just nine miles wide at its narrowest point.

Eighth, Egypt blocked Israeli shipping lanes in the Red Sea, Israel's only maritime access to trading routes with Asia and Africa. This step was understandably regarded as an act of war by Jerusalem. The United States spoke about joining with other countries to break the blockade, but, in the end, did not act.

Ninth, France, which had been Israel's principal arms supplier, announced a ban on the sale of weapons on the eve of the June war. That left Israel in potentially grave danger if a war were to drag on and require the resupply of arms. It was not until the next year that the U.S. stepped into the breach and sold vital weapons systems to Israel.

And finally, after winning the war of self-defense, Israel hoped that its newly-acquired territories, seized from Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, would be the basis for a land-for-peace accord. Feelers were sent out. The formal response came on September 1, 1967, when the Arab Summit Conference famously declared in Khartoum: "No peace, no recognition, no negotiations" with Israel.

Today, there are those who wish to rewrite history.



They want the world to believe there was once a Palestinian state. There was not.

They want the world to believe there were fixed borders between that state and Israel. There was only an armistice line between Israel and the Jordanian-controlled West Bank and eastern Jerusalem.

They want the world to believe the 1967 war was a bellicose act by Israel. It was an act of self-defense in the face of blood-curdling threats to vanquish the Jewish state, not to mention the maritime blockade of the Straits of Tiran, the abrupt withdrawal of UN peacekeeping forces, and the redeployment of Egyptian and Syrian troops. All wars have consequences. This one was no exception. But the Arab aggressors have utterly failed to take responsibility for the actions they instigated.


They want the world to believe post-1967 Israeli settlement-building is the key obstacle to Arab-Israeli peacemaking. The Six-Day War is proof positive that the core issue is, and always has been, whether the Arab world accepts the Jewish people's right to a state of their own. If so, all other contentious issues, however difficult, have possible solutions. But, alas, if not, all bets are off.

And they want the world to believe the Arab world had nothing against Jews per se, only Israel, yet trampled with abandon on sites of sacred meaning to the Jewish people.


In other words, when it comes to the Arab-Israeli conflict, dismissing the past as if it were a minor irritant at best, irrelevant at worst, won't work.

Can history move forward? Absolutely. Israel's peace treaties with Egypt in 1979 and Jordan in 1994 prove the point. At the same time, though, the lessons of the Six-Day War illustrate just how tough and tortuous the path can be.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-harris/why-history-matters-the-1_b_7523188.html


Brilliant article which shows up the sham history being invented by the likes of the BDS movement. He also left out one vital bit of information of the 1964 PLO charter, one that did not call for the creation of Gaza and the West Bank into a Palestinian state, even though they were occupied by the Jordanians and Egyptians.

quite amazing how so many back the destruction of a nation and it's people, isreal have been victims for so long yet have often stood alone and been labelled the aggressor and to blame, I guess arab money talks...

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem...
Bless your people Lord....

Deconstructing the Zionist View of Gaza’s Horror – An Analysis (28 July 2014) by Lawrence Davidson



Part I – David Harris and the American Jewish Congress


For reasons unknown I have ended up on the list-serve of the American Jewish Congress. This means I receive messages sent out by its executive director, David Harris. Sometimes I even read them.


On 18 July 2014 I got just such a missive explaining that “too many in the international community fail to grasp the stark realities” Israel faces and its “severely limited policy options.” To set everyone straight Harris wrote an op-ed in the Boston Globe (also dated 18 July), a copy of which came along with his mailing.


Since the horror in Gaza continues unabated and Harris’s letter can be taken as representative of the American Zionist point of view, I decided that it was appropriate for me to deconstruct his op-ed for my own blog and list-serve. One should note that a similar contesting of Israeli rationalizations, dealing with somewhat different points, appears in a 25 July 2014 online article, entitled “Five Israeli Talking Points on Gaza – Debunked,” from the Nation magazine.


Before looking at the op-ed we should note that Mr. Harris lives in a very tightly defined world. It is a world defined by a set of unquestioned assumptions which are prescribed by a thoroughly assimilated ideology. That ideology is, of course Zionism, the a priori assumption of which is the right of Israel to exist as a Zionist state, that is an exclusively Jewish state. Unfortunately, there are many negative consequences coming from this assumption and one major one is this: you cannot create a state for one group alone in the midst of a large population of other, non-group people, without creating a discriminatory environment. Statehood requires the institutionalizing of that environment through laws that create superior and inferior populations based on who is or is not in the favored group that the state is designed to serve. This will almost inevitably lead to segregation, extreme economic disparities and, quite possibly, ethnic cleansing. This is exactly the result of putting the claim of Israel’s right to exist as a Zionist state into practice. The flip-side of this process is a piece of reality (not another assumption) that is nonetheless not allowed for in Mr. Harris’s world, and that is the discriminated population’s legitimate right to resist.


Part II – David Harris’s Op-Ed


Here are the main points put forth the Boston Globe Op-ed:


A) Harris starts by laying all blame for the ongoing death and destruction in Gaza on Hamas. He calls the present round of fighting, “the latest Hamas-triggered war.” Is this accurate? Actually the accusation is based on the unsubstantiated assertion of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s that Hamas ordered the kidnapping and murder of three teenagers from an illegal settlement in June. This event was the trigger – the foreground context – for the present confrontation. No independent credible evidence has been offered for Netanyahu’s accusation. Nonetheless, what followed was widespread arrests on the West Bank by Israel, carried out in a near-random fashion, as well as increased pressure on Gaza. Hamas responded to both these actions with renewed rocket attacks. The confrontation escalated from there.


The background to all of this is also worth noting. It was put best by the astute and honest Jewish critic, M. J. Rosenberg. While condemning the rocket attacks from Gaza, he notes that “It is Israel which has kept Gaza under blockade since 2006 when it decided it would not accept the result of a free and fair election that put Hamas in power. A blockade is an act of war and Israel has, by that definition, been at war with Gaza for almost a decade, a war it waged through its incessant punishment of innocent civilians. Did Netanyahu think Hamas would simply accept that forever?” None of these facts are mentioned in Mr. Harris’s op-ed.


B) Harris goes on to lament that “the hope for an early end [to the present fighting] was dashed when an Egyptian-brokered cease-fire proposal was accepted by Israel, but was met by Hamas by a barrage of rockets aimed at the Jewish state.” How accurate is this? It certainly is not the whole story.


The military dictatorship that now passes for a government in Egypt is an ally of Israel. What was put forth as a ceasefire offer was a plan conjured up by Egypt in consultation with Israel, and possibly the U.S., and then presented to Hamas as a take-it-or-leave-it affair. Hamas was never consulted, nor were there any benefits for Hamas and the people of Gaza in the offer other than a temporary halt in the slaughter being carried out by Israel. Here is what the renowned Amira Hass, one of the few objective Israeli reporters, put it: “the offer “is not meant to bring progress and change to the people of Gaza, but to marginalize them [Hamas] as a political movement.”


Hamas itself had offered a ceasefire plan on July 14. It offered a ten-year truce in exchange for the lifting of the eight-year-old blockade – the one that constitutes an Israeli act of war and has turned Gaza into a huge open-air prison. Again, this ceasefire offer was not mentioned by Mr. Harris in his op-ed even though he must certainly be aware of it. Nor did the Western media that covered the one-sided Egyptian ceasefire offer pay much attention to the Hamas proposal, even though it would have given Israel a long-term respite from rocket attacks. Nor did anyone seem to remember that Hamas had made a similar offer back in 2008. Both then and now the Hamas offers were, to borrow words from Mr. Harris, “met by a barrage of rockets” fired from Israeli jets and tanks.


C) Harris asserts that the present “reality” leads Israeli leaders to conclude that what they face in Gaza is “an adversary determined to at all costs to wage war, won’t change its outlook, [and] seeks to maximize murder and mayhem, and that this adversary must therefore be answered with a strong, unambiguous response.” This is a rather bizarre assertion. From the Palestinian perspective (to which Mr. Harris will give no credence), this is an exact description of Israeli attitudes and policies. Could Mr. Harris be projecting the behavior of those he champions onto those he despises?


D) Mr. Harris goes on: “It is important to remember that it [the present “murder and mayhem”] did not have to be this way.” What does he mean? He proceeds to lay out a “what might have been” story that goes as follows: “In 2005 Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon unilaterally withdrew all settlers and soldiers from Gaza, giving this narrow strip of land its first chance in history … to exercise sovereignty. That could have become the springboard for a new start, perhaps the beginning of a Singapore on the Mediterranean. But within two years Hamas … seized power. Rather than Gaza’s construction the goal became Israel’s destruction.”


Does Harris really believe this? It certainly has no relation to how Palestinians experienced the event. From their perspective his story is at best a decontextualized invention. What he does not tell us is that Ariel Sharon was (according to David Ben Gurion) a consistent liar and (according to major human rights organizations) a serial war criminal. His motives for pulling out the settlers out of Gaza had nothing to do with the future prosperity of the Palestinians, whom he despised and wished ultimately to be killed or expelled, and it certainly did not offer Gaza “sovereignty.” The withdrawal of the settlers signaled two strategies on Sharon’s part: a concentration of Israeli settlement efforts on the West Bank, and creating the conditions for the blockade that now makes Gaza nothing short of a ghetto-like prison camp. It should be kept in mind – if possible even in Mr. Harris’ mind – that the strangulation of Gaza began before the election of Hamas to power in 2008.


E) Finally, David Harris concludes his op-ed by insisting that Israel is a democratic society that plays by civilized rules while its adversaries are uncivilized, undemocratic and play by no such rules. He tells us that “this can be difficult for some outside the region to grasp. It runs so contrary to how we live our daily lives, much less how, when necessary, we wage war as democratic nations.” Again, Harris has slipped into invention and fantasy. Israel is a full democratic society only for its Jewish citizens. For non-Jews it is not a democracy, but rather akin to an apartheid society. And, as to the waging of war,democratic nations wage war in barbaric fashion and do not hesitate to act as terrorists too. Hamas and the other Palestinian fighting groups, even at their most bloody, are pale reflections of the armies that have slaughtered millions of Vietnamese, Iraqis, and Afghanis, and those that destroyed the peaceful society that once lived in Palestine.


Part III – David Harris’s Shrinking World


David Harris lives in a peculiarly narrow world. And, it is significant that Israeli behavior is causing the number of people who share that world to decline. Unfortunately, their number still includes some very powerful people, as witnessed by the U.S. Senate’s most recent unanimous vote to support Israel’s barbarism in Gaza. Then again, most of these senators only precariously held to the Zionist cause through a process of political bribery. The truth is that outside Israel, Washington, D.C. and various other Zionist strongholds, David Harris’s worldview is crumbling. And, as the numbers of those who share his viewpoint shrinks, other counter-groups, such as the boycott Israel movement, grow in number. Sooner or later a tipping point will be reached and then things will change and probably do so rapidly. On that day what will David Harris do? Blame it all on anti-Semitism? Take residence at the top of Masada? Or grudgingly seek to make his peace with the Palestinians?

http://www.tothepointanalyses.com/2861
Lawrence Davidson was born in 1945 in Philadelphia PA. He grew up in Elizabeth NJ in a secular Jewish household. In 1963 he matriculated at Rutgers University for his BA.



The author of Didge's piece, David Harris, who brokered 1 million Jews to move to Israel, who had no contact with Israel in their background, but had the 'Right of Return' - the 'Risght of Return' Israel denies people who were born there and have documents saying they own land there.

What has that got to do with the 1967 war?

probably nothing but she just hates jews... sad really...

Belatucadros wrote:What has that got to do with the 1967 war?

Because your OP was written by Harris, who has a very odd view of anything to do with Israel/Palestine, and who most people disregard because of it.

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:probably nothing but she just hates jews... sad really...

she does and again Israel will never be defeated ever it is protected and blessed of God .
Those jews that are against Israel are an abomination to the Lord and i wouldn't want to be in their shoes, how can they ever go against their roots .

And lest we forget, it wasn't just Muslims the that were expelled and butchered to get them out of Palestine.

risingsun wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:What has that got to do with the 1967 war?

Because your OP was written by Harris, who has a very odd view of anything to do with Israel/Palestine, and who most people disregard because of it.

So, that does not prove your counter reply to another article he has written is right.
All you are doing poorly is trying to discredit the writer and not the facts he has stated.
You want to take on the points be my guest but they are all factual points he made

hatred cannot see past itself, she hates isreal and cannot get over that fact...

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:hatred cannot see past itself, she hates isreal and cannot get over that fact...

I told you you are on ignore and this is a good reason as to why, because you have no intention of debating the topic but to shit stir about a poster. When you grow up, then I will engage you again in debate. She has a right to her views, just as I have a right to counter them.

Belatucadros wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:hatred cannot see past itself, she hates isreal and cannot get over that fact...

I told you you are on ignore and this is a good reason as to why, because you have no intention of debating the topic but to shit stir about a poster. When you grow up, then I will engage you again in debate. She has a right to her views, just as I have a right to counter them.

if I am ignore how did you answer my post...

who died and made you king of the dogshit pile, i can comment on any topic I like....


please leave me on ignore you bore me anyway, by the way would Jesus put someone on ignore...hypocrite....

Belatucadros wrote:Mark 3:31-35

I take it that is a no then..lol

besides you don't believe the Jesus of the bible you invented your on, so use your own scriptures...

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:Mark 3:31-35

I take it that is a no then..lol

besides you don't believe the Jesus of the bible you invented your on, so use your own scriptures...

You have proven that you are such an ignorant fuckwit.
This is my last post to you and you did come on here shity stirring and have every right to tell you to stop being a twat, as your spoiling threads.

Belatucadros wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

I take it that is a no then..lol

besides you don't believe the Jesus of the bible you invented your on, so use your own scriptures...

You have proven that you are such an ignorant fuckwit.
This is my last post to you and you did come on here shity stirring and have every right to tell you to stop being a twat, as your spoiling threads.

i have proven you do not follow the Jesus of the bible, no need to swear it does not add to your argument merely your ignorance...

that would be you are... your would belong to you.

The author of that article likes to cherry pick certain events and dismiss everything else that was going on.

What type of state could the Palestinian's have had any day of the week? One that was to the liking of Israel where theyl would control the place and leave the Palestinian's to run their own affairs under their juristiction.

And the six day war was started by Israel when there was no threat to the state of Israel. Israel attacked and they had been planning it all along because they wanted the area they captured. They are never going to leave and Netanyahu has confirmed that just as Israel did way back in 1947 when their real leaders said they would never accept the partition oh their homeland that was promised to them by God.

Irn Bru wrote:The author of that article likes to cherry pick certain events and dismiss everything else that was going on.

What type of state could the Palestinian's have had any day of the week? One that was to the liking of Israel where theyl would control the place and leave the Palestinian's to run their own affairs under their juristiction.

And the six day war was started by Israel when there was no threat to the state of Israel. Israel attacked and they had been planning it all along because they wanted the area they captured. They are never going to leave and Netanyahu has confirmed that just as Israel did way back in 1947 when their real leaders said they would never accept the partition oh their homeland that was promised to them by God.

 Dear me another apologist to naked aggression.
Please explain how Egypt and Syria had no intent to wipe out Israel?

Belatucadros wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:The author of that article likes to cherry pick certain events and dismiss everything else that was going on.

What type of state could the Palestinian's have had any day of the week? One that was to the liking of Israel where theyl would control the place and leave the Palestinian's to run their own affairs under their juristiction.

And the six day war was started by Israel when there was no threat to the state of Israel. Israel attacked and they had been planning it all along because they wanted the area they captured. They are never going to leave and Netanyahu has confirmed that just as Israel did way back in 1947 when their real leaders said they would never accept the partition oh their homeland that was promised to them by God.

 Dear me another apologist to naked aggression.
Please explain how Egypt and Syria had no intent to wipe out Israel?

I'm no apologist for anyone including Egypt and Syria.

Go to the website for the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs and look up Begin's speech to the National Defence Council where you will see that he confirms what I say.

Irn Bru wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:
 Dear me another apologist to naked aggression.
Please explain how Egypt and Syria had no intent to wipe out Israel?

I'm no apologist for anyone including Egypt and Syria.

Go to the website for the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs and look up Begin's speech to the National Defence Council where you will see that he confirms what I say.

That is a poor deflection, so I will ask you again.
At the time, did both nations vow to wipe out the Jews.
Take your time, or are you going to give me more apologoist left wing bullshit?

At that time, had Israel launched an unprovoked attack and were intent on wiping out Arabs?

risingsun wrote:At that time, had Israel launched an unprovoked attack and were intent on wiping out Arabs?

Again a simple question is being avoided.
Did the Egyptians vow to wipe out Israel?

Belatucadros wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:
 Dear me another apologist to naked aggression.
Please explain how Egypt and Syria had no intent to wipe out Israel?

I'm no apologist for anyone including Egypt and Syria.

Go to the website for the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs and look up Begin's speech to the National Defence Council where you will see that he confirms what I say.

That is a poor deflection, so I will ask you again.
At the time, did both nations vow to wipe out the Jews.
Take your time, or are you going to give me more apologoist left wing bullshit?

No it's not. I'm telling you that Israel started the six day was when there was no threat to Israel from Egypt. Go and look it up even if it's just for historical reference.

Once you have done that you I promise you will be better informed that you are now.

Irn Bru wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:


That is a poor deflection, so I will ask you again.
At the time, did both nations vow to wipe out the Jews.
Take your time, or are you going to give me more apologoist left wing bullshit?

No it's not. I'm telling you that Israel started the six day was when there was no threat to Israel from Egypt. Go and look it up even if it's just for historical reference.

Once you have done that you I promise you will be better informed that you are now.

You shy away from a simple question again.
My my is the poor boy running scared.
Again, did the Egyptians vow to wipe out the Jews?
I know history better than you, sadly you ignore important parts because you are a left wing Islamist apologist. Now again, why did Egypt ask for the UN forces to leave?
Take your time boy, you are getting an a class education in history, not the left wing claptrap you learnt from idiots

Belatucadros wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:


That is a poor deflection, so I will ask you again.
At the time, did both nations vow to wipe out the Jews.
Take your time, or are you going to give me more apologoist left wing bullshit?

No it's not. I'm telling you that Israel started the six day was when there was no threat to Israel from Egypt. Go and look it up even if it's just for historical reference.

Once you have done that you I promise you will be better informed that you are now.

You shy away from a simple question again.
My my is the poor boy running scared.
Again, did the Egyptians vow to wipe out the Jews?
I know history better than you, sadly you ignore important parts because you are a left wing Islamist apologist. Now again, why did Egypt ask for the UN forces to leave?
Take your time boy, you are getting an a class education in history, not the left wing claptrap you learnt from idiots

You obviously don't know history that well or you would be quoting chapter and verse from his speech. So let's see you use the history degree that you claim to have by using it to full effect by drawing on what he said about the six day war.

Irn Bru wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:


You shy away from a simple question again.
My my is the poor boy running scared.
Again, did the Egyptians vow to wipe out the Jews?
I know history better than you, sadly you ignore important parts because you are a left wing Islamist apologist. Now again, why did Egypt ask for the UN forces to leave?
Take your time boy, you are getting an a class education in history, not the left wing claptrap you learnt from idiots

You obviously don't know history that well or you would be quoting chapter and verse from his speech. So let's see you use the history degree that you claim to have by using it to full effect by drawing on what he said about the six day war.

Again you cannot answer a simple question.
Are you denying the Egyptians vowed to wipe out the Jews in Israel?
Take your time.
I know you are onto a loss and your apologist bullshit will not cut it being the fact you have no answer and are stalling.
So lets ask you Irn, what would you do, if the English, the Welsh and the Irish vowed to wipe the Scottish people out and made aggressive moves to do so?

Belatucadros wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:


You shy away from a simple question again.
My my is the poor boy running scared.
Again, did the Egyptians vow to wipe out the Jews?
I know history better than you, sadly you ignore important parts because you are a left wing Islamist apologist. Now again, why did Egypt ask for the UN forces to leave?
Take your time boy, you are getting an a class education in history, not the left wing claptrap you learnt from idiots

You obviously don't know history that well or you would be quoting chapter and verse from his speech. So let's see you use the history degree that you claim to have by using it to full effect by drawing on what he said about the six day war.

Again you cannot answer a simple question.
Are you denying the Egyptians vowed to wipe out the Jews in Israel?
Take your time.
I know you are onto a loss and your apologist bullshit will not cut it being the fact you have no answer and are stalling.
So lets ask you Irn, what would you do, if the English, the Welsh and the Irish vowed to wipe the Scottish people out and made aggressive moves to do so?

I would fight them but you need to show me that the Egyptian's threatened to wipe out Israel in the six day war.

Go on - show me.

Oh dear, now dont you look a twat Irn

Address by Prime Minister Begin at the National Defense College



Oh dear, you certainly do look a twat. These are the words staright from Begin himself.

Israel sarted the six day war and admit there was no threat from Egypt.

Irn Bru wrote:Address by Prime Minister Begin at the National Defense College



Oh dear, you certainly do look a twat. These are the words staright from Begin himself.

Israel sarted the six day war and admit there was no threat from Egypt.

Is that it?
Again how do you explain all the quotes I gave you?
Are you that much of an apologist islamist?
Again explain them Irn?
I am not denying words from Israel, but face with all those words of destruction, what was Israel to do?
Try again

Belatucadros wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:Address by Prime Minister Begin at the National Defense College



Oh dear, you certainly do look a twat. These are the words staright from Begin himself.

Israel sarted the six day war and admit there was no threat from Egypt.

Is that it?
Again how do you explain all the quotes I gave you?
Are you that much of an apologist islamist?
Again explain them Irn?
I am not denying words from Israel, but face with all those words of destruction, what was Israel to do?
Try again

Where was the threat from Egypt? If the Israeli prime minister didn't see it why did you? Based on stuff posted on the internet that's as much rheteric as anything else.

There was no threat was there?

I was right.

Oh my goodness you really are the most cluless leftist idiot I know:


March 8th 1965
"We shall not enter Palestine with its soil covered in sand, we shall enter it with its soil saturated in blood" - President of Egypt, Gamal Abdel Nasser [20]
Feb 22nd 1967
“it is the duty of all of us now to move from defensive positions to offensive positions and enter the battle to liberate the usurped land…Everyone must face the test and enter the battle to the end.” - President Attassi of Syria[1]
April 8th 1967
“(this battle will be)…followed by more severe battles until Palestine is liberated and the Zionist presence ended.” - Syria’s information minister Mahmoud Zubi [1]
May 12th 1967
"In view of the fourteen incidents of sabotage and infiltration perpetrated in the past month alone, Israel may have no other choice but to adopt suitable countermeasures against the focal points of sabotage. Israel will continue to take action to prevent any and all attempts to perpetrate sabotage within her territory. There will be no immunity for any state which aids or abets such acts." - PM Levi Eshkol speech [10]
May 13th 1967
Egypt must expect "an Israeli invasion of Syria immediately after Independence Day, with the aim of overthrowing the Damascus regime" [10] Soviet misinformation delivered to Anwar Sadat in Moscow.
May 15th 1967
“Israel wants to make it clear to the government of Egypt that it has no aggressive intentions whatsoever against any Arab state at all” - Israel’s Prime Minister Levi Eshkol [4]
May 16th 1967
'...I gave my instructions to all UAR forces to be ready for action against Israel the moment it might carry out any aggressive action against any Arab country. Due to these instructions our troops are already concentrated in Sinai on our eastern border. For the sake of the complete security of all UN troops…I request that you issue your orders to withdraw all troops immediately. [5] - written request from Nasser to Commander UNEF (Gaza)
"The existence of Israel has continued too long. We welcome the Israeli aggression. We welcome the battle we have long awaited. The peak hour has come. The battle has come in which we shall destroy Israel." - Cairo Radio
May 17th 1967
“All Egypt is now prepared to plunge into total war which will put an end to Israel” - Cairo Radio
"We had hoped yesterday that tension in the Israel-Syria-UAR triangle was dropping after an ostentatious Egyptian show of putting its forces around Cairo on alert. Last night, however, we and the Israelis learned that the Egyptians have moved forces into the Sinai. Now they have moved forces in front of the UN Emergency Force on the Israel-UAR border and all but ordered it to withdraw." - Memorandum From the President's Special Assistant (Rostow) to President Johnson [30 Doc 7]
May 18th 1967
“The Zionist barrack in Palestine is about to collapse and be destroyed. Every one of the hundred million Arabs has been living for the past nineteen years on one hope – to live to see the day Israel is liquidated…There is no life, no peace nor hope for the gangs of Zionism to remain in the occupied land.”
“As of today, there no longer exists an international emergency force to protect Israel….The sole method we shall apply against Israel is a total war which will result in the extermination of Zionist existence”. - Cairo Radio’s Voice of the Arabs broadcast
“Egypt has decided to terminate the presence of the United Nations Emergency Force from the territory of the United Arab Republic and Gaza Strip. Therefore I request that the necessary steps be taken for the withdrawal of the Force as soon as possible.” - Egyptian ambassador Kony informs U Thant - U.N. A/6730/Add.3 26th June 1967
“Irrespective of the reasons for the actions you have taken, in all frankness, may I advise you that I have serious misgivings about it for…I believe that this Force has been an important factor in maintaining the relative quiet in the area of its deployment during the past ten years and that its withdrawal may have grave implications for peace.” - UN Secretary General U Thant cables Cairo advising that UNEF would be withdrawn.
“The presence of the Emergency Forces in the Sinai desert had kept tensions down. We don’t have to look further for a United Nations success. Yet the Government of the United Arab Republic has made a formal request for the withdrawal of UNEF from its territory as soon as possible.
It really makes a mockery of the peacekeeping work of the United Nations if, as soon as the tension rises, the United Nations force it told to leave. Indeed the collapse of UNEF might well have repercussions on other United Nations peacekeeping forces, and the credibility of the United Nations in this field are thrown into question.” - George Brown (British Foreign Secretary), speaking at United Nations Association annual dinner in London [21]]
…”UNEF was established with the full concurrence of the United Nations…any decision to withdraw the force should be taken in the United Nations after full consultation with all the countries involved – it should not be taken as the result of some unilateral decision.” - George Brown (British Foreign Secretary), speaking at United Nations Association annual dinner in London [21]
"You are correct, Mr. President, in stating that we are having our patience tried to the limits. There have been 15 attempts at murder and sabotage in the past six weeks. We have not reacted. This in itself proves that there is no lack of temperance and responsibility on our part. On the other hand, the problem is not solved indefinitely by inaction. We cannot always rely on the stroke of fortune which has so far prevented the terrorist acts from taking the toll of life and injury intended by the perpetrators. - extract from telegram from Eshkol to Pres. LB Johnson.
May 19th 1967
“I do not want to cause alarm but it is difficult for me not to warn the Council that, as I see it, the position in the Middle East is more disturbing…indeed more menacing than at any time since the fall of 1956.” - UN Secretary General U Thant, Security Council meeting - U.N. S/7906 26th May 1967
Israel [will] not initiate hostilities “...until or unless (Egyptian forces) close the Straits of Tiran to free navigation by Israel” - Prime Minister Levi Eshkol message to France’s President de Gaulle.
“Israel would stop at nothing to cancel the blockade. It is essential that President Nasser should not have any illusions.” - Eshkol tells leading maritime powers
"Our intention to regard the closing of the Straits as a casus belli was communicated...to the foreign ministers of those states which had supported international navigation in the Straits in 1957 and thereafter. There can be no doubt that these warnings reached Cairo. One thing was now clear. If Nasser imposed a blockade, the explosion would ensue not from 'miscalculation', but from an open-eyed and conscious readiness for war." - Abba Eban[10]
May 20th 1967
“Our forces are now entirely ready not only to repulse any aggression, but to initiate the act ourselves, and to explode the Zionist presence in the Arab homeland of Palestine. The Syrian army, with its finger on the trigger, is united. I believe that the time has come to begin a battle of anihilation.”- Syria’s Defence Minister Hafez Assad (later to be Syria’s President).
May 22nd 1967
“The Israeli flag shall not go through the Gulf of Aqaba. Our sovereignty over the entrance to the Gulf cannot be disputed” - Egypt’s President Nasser
"We want a full scale, popular war of liberation… to destroy the Zionist enemy" - Syrian president Dr. Nureddin al-Attasi speech to troops [6]
May 23rd 1967
"[The Arab blockade of Israel shipping in the Gulf of Aqaba is] illegal and potentially disastrous to the cause of peace. ...The purported closing of the Gulf of Aqaba has brought a new and grave dimension to the crisis. The United States considers the gulf to be an international waterway."President LB Johnson - Times May 24th 1967 full text here
May 24th 1967
"[Egypt’s blockade] must not be allowed to triumph; Britain would join with others in an effort to open the Straits.” - UK Prime Minister Harold Wilson to Israel’s foreign minister Abba Eban
May 26th 1967
"Taking over Sharm el Sheikh meant confrontation with Israel (and) also meant that we were ready to enter a general war with Israel. The battle will be a general one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel” - Gamal Abdel Nasser speech to the General Council of the International Confederation of Arab Trade Unions
May 28th 1967
“The existence of Israel is in itself an aggression…what happened in 1948 was an aggression – an aggression against the Palestinian people. 
…(the crisis had developed because) “Eshkol threatened to march on Damascus, occupy Syria and overthrow the Syrian regime. It was our duty to come to the aid of our Arab brother. It was our duty to ask for the withdrawal of UNEF. When UNEF went, we had to go to the Gulf of Aqaba and restore things to what they were when we were in Aqaba in 1956” - Gamel Abdel Nasser at a press conference for several hundred of the World’s press. [9] 

“We will not accept any…coexistence with Israel.…Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel….The war with Israel is in effect since 1948”. - Gamel Abdel Nasser press conference
May 29th 1967
“Now, eleven years after 1956 we are restoring things to what they were in 1956…The issue now at hand is not the Gulf of Aqaba, the Straits of Tiran or the withdrawal of UNEF, but the rights of the Palestinian people.” - Nasser speech to General Assembly in Cairo:
- Vance, Vick, and Pierre Lauer: Hussein of Jordan. London: Peter Owen, 1968
May 30th 1967
"The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel ... to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not of more declarations." - Gamal Abdel Nasser speech
May 31st 1967
“The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear - to wipe Israel off the map” - President Aref of Iraq
“Under the terms of the military agreement signed with Jordan, Jordanian artillery, coordinated with the forces of Egypt and Syria, is in a position to cut Israel in two at Qalqilya, where Israeli territory between the Jordan armistice line and the Mediterranean Sea is only 12 kilometres wide”. - Al Akhbar, Cairo's daily newspaper
UK Parliamentary debate regarding the hasty removal of the United Nations Emergency Force:
"Taking the fire brigade away just when fire was about to burst out" - Foreign Secretary George Brown
“Entirely incomprehensible” - Edward Heath.
“a fatal and perhaps fateful error of judgment” "...this was the last chance for the United Nations to get a grip on themselves and apply the principles of their Charter” - Sir Alec Douglas-Home
"...the first casualty (of this crisis) had been the United Nations. It would need an immense effort, an almost superhuman effort, to restore the prestige of that organization"- Sir Alec Douglas-Home
" ...they could not expect the people of Israel, who have done nothing wrong, to sit for a prolonged period until the pincer movement had got them so entrapped that they could not go on." - Sir Barnett Janner
"The characteristic of this situation is the declared aim of one side not to win concessions from the other. Their demand is that Israel should cease to exist - indeed has never existed.  ...What had to be sought was not merely how to avoid war but to create the conditions of peace. One condition of a lasting peace must be the recognition that Israel has a right to live. Israel had been for nearly 20 years a member of the United Nations entitled to the respect and protection of the United Nations."- Prime Minister Harold Wilson The Times [27]
June 1st 1967
“Brethren and sons, this is the day of the battle to avenge our martyred brethren who fell in 1948. It is the day to wash away the stigma. We shall, God willing, meet in Tel Aviv and Haifa” - Radio broadcast by Iraqi President Abdel Rahman Aref
- 11.00 GMT June 1st 1967, Baghdad Domestic Service in Arabic , Foreign Broadcast Information Service
“Those who survive will remain in Palestine. I estimate that none of them will survive.”- Ahmed Shukairy, chairman of PLO in Jordanian Jerusalem, asked in news interview what will happen to the Israelis if there is a war
"When the organs of Arab propaganda raised the contention that Israel is concentrating forces in order to attack Syria, I invited your Ambassador in Israel to visit the frontier to find out for himself that there was no truth in this allegation. To my regret, the Ambassador did not respond to our invitation. The Chief of Staff of the UNTSO checked these claims and informed the Secretary-General of the UN and the capitals of the region that there were no Israel concentrations on the Syrian border. The Secretary-General even included a statement to this effect in the Report he submitted on May 19th to the Security Council."- Levi Eshkol, Prime Minister of Israel, to Russian Premiere Kosygin[17]
June 2nd 1967
“We will coordinate efforts of the PLO with responsible authorities in Jordan in all fields – politically, militarily and materially…”  "It was very probable that the Jordan army might start the battle.” - Ahmed Shukairy - The Times, Nicholas Herbert, Amman, June 1st
June 3rd 1967
“You must not do anything to entangle Israel with the Jordanians...” - Israel’s newly-appointed Defence Minister Moshe Dayan, instructs the head of the Israeli Army Central Command[6]
June 4th 1967to the Zionist trap of supporting Israel in the present crisis.
"There are no words I can use to express my disappointment at the attitude that the British Government has taken with regard to the Gulf of Aqaba - King Husain of Jordan, press conference in Amman - The Times, June 5th 1967 p4, Nicholas Herbert, Amman "WARNING TO BRITAIN BY KING HUSAIN:Danger of losing Arab friends"
June 6th 1967
"I have just come from Jerusalem to tell the Security Council that Israel, by its independent effort and sacrifice, has passed from serious danger to successful resistance.
Two days ago Israel's condition caused much concern across the humane and friendly world. Israel had reached a sombre hour. Let me try to evoke the point at which our fortunes stood.
An army, greater than any force ever assembled in history in Sinai, had massed against Israel's southern frontier. Egypt had dismissed the United Nations forces which symbolized the international interest in the maintenance of peace in our region. Nasser had provocatively brought five infantry divisions and two armoured divisions up to our very gates; 80,000 men and 900 tanks were poised to move."- Abba Eban, Israel's Foreign Minister addresses UN Security Council[url=http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Foreign Relations/Israels Foreign Relations since 1947/1947-1974/19 Statement to the Security Council by Foreign Mi]full text here[/url]
June 14th 1967
"Wars are not always begun by shots. They are often begun by action and the action which really created the state of war in an acute sense was the imposition of the blockade. To try to murder somebody by strangulation is just as much attempted murder as if you tried to murder him by a shot, and therefore the act of strangulation was the first violent, physical act which had its part in the sequence. But also on that Monday morning we acted against the movement of forces. The Egyptian air force had been making incursions into Israel before, whether for reconnaissance or for other reasons, but there had been a pattern of encroachment. One never knows when aircraft come towards you what their intention is.
A document which we subsequently captured revealed a very instructive picture. The Egyptian command was taking a very intense interest in the disposition of Israel's very few airfields. They wanted to know where they were, and there was an operation plan, which I read to the Security Council, about how to knock them out. My impression is, therefore, that those aircraft which appeared on our radar screens that Monday morning were the start of an operation agianst our air fields. Whether they were to make the first reconnaissance move or the first knock-out is not relevant in this era of war. But we acted against movement towards us in the air." - Abba Eban TV broadcast [18]
June 19th 1967

“If a single act of folly was more responsible for this explosion than any other it was the arbitrary and dangerous announced decision that the Straits of Tiran would be closed. The right of innocent, maritime passage must be preserved for all nations" - US President Lyndon Johnson

I was right. Begin said so.

No threat from Egypt.

His words staright from the Israeli website.

Irn Bru wrote:I was right. Begin said so.

No threat from Egypt.

His words staright from the Israeli website.

So you have just ignored all words recorded in history.
That is denial for you and the worst apologist going.
I never denied words spoken from Israeli's, funny how you ignore all others though is it not or troop build up on the borders.
Seriously you lefties do make me laugh how you invent history
This is nota debate, this you being an idiot in denial, fuck off and stop wasting my time you left wing Islamist

Belatucadros wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:I was right. Begin said so.

No threat from Egypt.

His words staright from the Israeli website.

So you have just ignored all words recorded in history.
That is denial for you and the worst apologist going.
I never denied words spoken from Israeli's, funny how you ignore all others though is it not or troop build up on the borders.
Seriously you lefties do make me laugh how you invent history
This is nota debate, this you being an idiot in denial, fuck off and stop wasting my time you left wing Islamist

I'm giving you the actual words from history as said by the Israeli prime minister of the day. You obviouly were not aware that he had said that.

No threat from Egypt - he said so.

I was right in what I said.

Irn Bru wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:


So you have just ignored all words recorded in history.
That is denial for you and the worst apologist going.
I never denied words spoken from Israeli's, funny how you ignore all others though is it not or troop build up on the borders.
Seriously you lefties do make me laugh how you invent history
This is nota debate, this you being an idiot in denial, fuck off and stop wasting my time you left wing Islamist

I'm giving you the actual words from history as said  by the Israeli prime minister of the day. You obviouly were not aware that he had said that.

No threat from Egypt - he said so.

I was right in what I said.

So you are denying the words recorded from Ergot then, how is that possible Irn?
You were well wrong as how can your hoice be so utterly wrong to recorded history.
Talk about clutching at straws, as again are you denying any of the words spoken?

Belatucadros wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:


So you have just ignored all words recorded in history.
That is denial for you and the worst apologist going.
I never denied words spoken from Israeli's, funny how you ignore all others though is it not or troop build up on the borders.
Seriously you lefties do make me laugh how you invent history
This is nota debate, this you being an idiot in denial, fuck off and stop wasting my time you left wing Islamist

I'm giving you the actual words from history as said  by the Israeli prime minister of the day. You obviouly were not aware that he had said that.

No threat from Egypt - he said so.

I was right in what I said.

So you are denying the words recorded from Ergot then, how is that possible Irn?
You were well wrong as how can your hoice be so utterly wrong to recorded history.
Talk about clutching at straws, as again are you denying any of the words spoken?

Didge old bean. Did Egypt follow through on any of these words that you have dragged from the internet?

There was no threat from Egypt at the time of the six day war so the guy Harris is wrong isn't he?

I was right - Israel started the six day war with no threat from Egypt. Begin the Israeli prime minister said so. He was just being honest so why can't you?

So Irn has a speech in 1982 which he has not read in full over what was said before Israel was going to be attaked.
That is desperate if ever I saw a left wing apologist of Islamism

Exposing False Zionist Quotes II (Quote Busters II)

* MIFTAH (The Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy), an organization under the helm of Hanan Ashrawi, aims to “increase global awareness and knowledge of Palestinian realities by providing reliable, accurate and comprehensive information, policy analysis, strategic briefings and position papers.” [emphasis added] To that stated end, the organization dispenses information on its Web site, among which are quotes attributed to Zionist leaders under the heading “Memorable Quotes.” * Media Monitors describes itself as “a non-profit, non-bias [sic] and non-political platform which mainly helps to prevail the whole truth and generally facilitate answers to any disputed, controversial topic being broadcast, web cast, published, distributed or telecast in the world media.” It calls upon journalists, editors, writers, reporters, researchers, columnists, content providers, etc. to join the organziation “to counter information warfare and fabricated propaganda in the world media.” An article on its Web site entitled “Apartheid in the Holy Land: Racism in the Zionist State of Israel” is filled with racist quotes by Zionist leaders. * British journalist Robert Fisk, known for his virulent anti-Israel sentiment, wrote a column for The Independent in April 2001 entitled: “When Journalists Refuse to Tell the Truth About Israel.” Suggesting that journalists fear being “slandered” as anti-Semites, he accuses them of covering up Israel’s supposed guilt thus “abetting terrible deeds in the Middle East.” Of the “truths” journalists are being censured for refusing to tell are several contemptuous quotes attributed to Israel’s leaders. All of the above rally against those who hide the truth or fabricate propaganda, while puporting to reveal the hidden facts. Their hypocrisy is mind-boggling as they disseminate “truths” that are anything but that. In Part I of our series on misquotes, we showed how the attribution of invidious statements to Israel’s leaders has become a popular stratagem among Israel’s enemies, with many quotes fabricated, taken out of context or otherwise manipulated to present a distorted, negative view of Zionist intentions and actions. Part II will examine some of the misquotes presented by self-proclaimed purveyors of truth. MIFTAH (www.miftah.org) Of the “memorable quotes” featured on MIFTAH’s Web site (some of which have already been debunked in Part I), the following is attributed to one Chairman Heilbrun: [size=undefined]We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves.[/size] Source given: Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983 Investigation: The quote is found on numerous anti-Israel sites, in addition to MIFTAH’s, but the facts do not check out. While Shlomo Lahat was indeed re-elected as mayor of Tel Aviv in 1983, no record was found of any “Chairman Heilbrun.” The quote was traced to a 1988 book, The Hidden History of Zionism, by radical Marxist Ralph Schoenman (dismissed by mainstream historians as a crazed conspiracy theorist), and is one of many bogus quotes in the book attributed to Israeli leaders. According to Schoenman’s footnote, the quote by Heilbrun was hearsay relayed to him in private conversations: [size=undefined]Cited by Fouzi El-Asmar and Salih Baransi during discussions with the author, October 1983[/size] Needless to say, Schoenman’s scholarship, upon which many anti-Israel Web sites depend, leaves much wanting. CAMERA contacted former Mayor Lahat who attested that he has never employed, known or heard of any such person as “Chairman Heilbrun,” and that the reported incident never took place. Lahat also emphasized that he would never allow any of his employees to make such statements, as it completely contradicts his own sentiments about Palestinians. Summary: Fabricated quote, fabricated source   Media Monitors (http://www.mediamonitors.net) An article archived on the Media Monitors Web site is filled with questionable assertions and bogus quotes (some of which were debunked in Part I.) The following quote (which also appears on the MIFTAH Web site) was attributed to Israeli Northern District Commissioner Israel Koenig, supposedly from his controversial report on Israeli Arabs in Galilee: [size=undefined]We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population.[/size] Source given: Cited in Lustick, Ian, Arabs in the Jewish State, University of Texas Press, Texas, 1980. Investigation: Neither the source given (Ian Lustick's Arabs in the Jewish State) nor the actual report itself  contains any mention of "terror, assassination, intimidation or land confiscation".  The Koenig Report or “memorandum” as it is sometimes referred to, was a private document of recommendations written in 1975 by civil servant Israel Koenig, the Interior Ministry’s official in charge of the Galilee, to alter the demographic balance of the region in favor of the Jews. The recommendations were rejected by then Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin, denounced by senior Cabinet ministers and rued by then foreign minister Yigal Alon who expressed great regret that the recommendations were ever written. It provoked controversy within Israel after being leaked to Al Hamishmar, the publication of Israel’s Marxist party, Mapam. Koenig’s recommendations included expanding and strengthening Israel’s Jewish presence in the Galilee, applying legal consequences to Arabs expressing hostility toward the state and Zionism, enforcing tax collection from the Arab sector, cutting family subsidies to Arabs with large families, eliminating preferential acceptance of Arabs into Israeli universities, channeling Arab students into studying the physical and natural sciences rather than humanities, and encouraging young Arabs to study abroad and emigrate. As controversial as Koenig’s proposals were at the time, however, there was absolutely no suggestion of using "terror," "assassination," "intimidation" or "land confiscations." Summary: Fabricated quote, false source    Robert Fisk According to Fisk’s article: [size=undefined][Arafat] is chastised by George Bush while his people are bestialised by the Israeli leadership. Rafael Eytan [sic], the former Israeli chief of staff, used to talk of the Palestinians as "cockroaches in a glass jar". Menachem Begin called them “two-legged beasts”…[/size] These quotes appear on numerous anti-Israel Web sites, raising the question of whether Fisk obtained his information on one of the sites that share his agenda. While there is some truth to these quotes, they are either distorted or taken out of context. Investigation--Example 1: Fisk suggests that Eitan routinely referred to the Palestinians as “cockroaches” He states this as fact, giving no source, but other internet sites refer to an April 13, 1983 article by Gad Becker in the Israeli daily, Yediot Ahronot. This original source of the quote, however, indicates that Eitan’s comment was atypical, made in specific reference to Arab violence. According to Becker, this “uncharacteristic”(as he puts it) and controversial comment was made by outgoing Chief of Staff Eitan during a discussion of how best to deal with Arab violence in the West Bank. In responding to suggestions by Knesset members that the army should stop stone throwers by shooting at their feet or throwing stones back, Eitan reportedly said: [size=undefined]The Arabs will never win over us by throwing stones. Our response must be a nationalist Zionist response. For every stone that’s thrown–we will build ten settlements. If 100 settlements will exist–and they will–between Nablus and Jerusalem, stones will not be thrown. If this will be the situation, then the Arabs will only be able to scurry around like drugged roaches in a bottle.[/size] Summary: A single (albeit controversial) remark made in a specific context is misrepresented as a generalized, routine slur by an Israeli leader Investigation--Example 2: Internet hate sites, as well as Fisk, attribute this derogation of Palestnians as “two-legged beasts” to former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. The source generally given is: [size=undefined]Menachem Begin, as quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the Beasts,"New Statesman, June 25, 1982[/size] Indeed, the radical French-Israeli journalist, Amnon Kapeliouk, did attribute such a quote to Begin in his New Statesman article criticizing Israel’s invasion of Lebanon. The author posited: [size=undefined]For this reason the government has gone to extraordinary lengths to dehumanise the Palestinians. Begin described them in a speech in the Knesset as "beasts walking on two legs".[/size] However, further investigation by CAMERA reveals that the actual speech upon which Kapeliouk based his quote, as well as news reports at the time demonstrate that the journalist distorted the quote, giving it a completely different tone and meaning. Begin was talking, not about "the Palestinians" but about terrorists who target children within Israel. On June 8, 1982, Begin addressed the Knesset in response to a no-confidence motion over Israel's invasion of Lebanon. He talked about defending the children of Israel, and according to a June 9, 1982 AP report, “his voice quaver[ed] with anger and sadness.” According to the minutes of the session, Begin stated: [size=undefined]The children of Israel will happily go to school and joyfully return home, just like the children in Washington, in Moscow, and in Peking, in Paris and in Rome, in Oslo, in Stockholm and in Copenhagen. The fate of... Jewish children has been different from all the children of the world throughout the generations. No more. We will defend our children. If the hand of any two-footed animal is raised against them, that hand will be cut off, and our children will grow up in joy in the homes of their parents.[/size] Kapeliouk neither recanted nor apologized for his deception. Summary: Distortion by an Israeli critic of a Begin speech discussing terrorism and terrorists. For more on false Zionist quotes, click here. Also check out CAMERA's "Urban Myths and Misquotes"

Islamism?

Irn Bru wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:


So you are denying the words recorded from Ergot then, how is that possible Irn?
You were well wrong as how can your hoice be so utterly wrong to recorded history.
Talk about clutching at straws, as again are you denying any of the words spoken?

Didge old bean. Did Egypt follow through on any of these words that you have dragged from the internet?

There was no threat from Egypt at the time of the six day war so the guy Harris is wrong isn't he?

I was right - Israel started the six day war with no threat from Egypt. Begin the Israeli prime minister said so. He was just being honest so why can't you?

You are wrong as per usual, you are going off the words later said years after, ignoring all threats and troops built up top attack and all the evidence they were going to attack and again they later did again. What you offer is pure babble, based off the words you badly misquite, Thatis your only defense.
Anything else ha ha

Belatucadros wrote:So Irn has a speech in 1982 which he has not read in full over what was said before Israel was going to be attaked.
That is desperate if ever I saw a left wing apologist of Islamism

Exposing False Zionist Quotes II (Quote Busters II)

* MIFTAH (The Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy), an organization under the helm of Hanan Ashrawi, aims to “increase global awareness and knowledge of Palestinian realities by providing reliable, accurate and comprehensive information, policy analysis, strategic briefings and position papers.” [emphasis added] To that stated end, the organization dispenses information on its Web site, among which are quotes attributed to Zionist leaders under the heading “Memorable Quotes.” * Media Monitors describes itself as “a non-profit, non-bias [sic] and non-political platform which mainly helps to prevail the whole truth and generally facilitate answers to any disputed, controversial topic being broadcast, web cast, published, distributed or telecast in the world media.” It calls upon journalists, editors, writers, reporters, researchers, columnists, content providers, etc. to join the organziation “to counter information warfare and fabricated propaganda in the world media.” An article on its Web site entitled “Apartheid in the Holy Land: Racism in the Zionist State of Israel” is filled with racist quotes by Zionist leaders. * British journalist Robert Fisk, known for his virulent anti-Israel sentiment, wrote a column for The Independent in April 2001 entitled: “When Journalists Refuse to Tell the Truth About Israel.” Suggesting that journalists fear being “slandered” as anti-Semites, he accuses them of covering up Israel’s supposed guilt thus “abetting terrible deeds in the Middle East.” Of the “truths” journalists are being censured for refusing to tell are several contemptuous quotes attributed to Israel’s leaders. All of the above rally against those who hide the truth or fabricate propaganda, while puporting to reveal the hidden facts. Their hypocrisy is mind-boggling as they disseminate “truths” that are anything but that. In Part I of our series on misquotes, we showed how the attribution of invidious statements to Israel’s leaders has become a popular stratagem among Israel’s enemies, with many quotes fabricated, taken out of context or otherwise manipulated to present a distorted, negative view of Zionist intentions and actions. Part II will examine some of the misquotes presented by self-proclaimed purveyors of truth. MIFTAH (www.miftah.org) Of the “memorable quotes” featured on MIFTAH’s Web site (some of which have already been debunked in Part I), the following is attributed to one Chairman Heilbrun: We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves. Source given: Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983 Investigation: The quote is found on numerous anti-Israel sites, in addition to MIFTAH’s, but the facts do not check out. While Shlomo Lahat was indeed re-elected as mayor of Tel Aviv in 1983, no record was found of any “Chairman Heilbrun.” The quote was traced to a 1988 book, The Hidden History of Zionism, by radical Marxist Ralph Schoenman (dismissed by mainstream historians as a crazed conspiracy theorist), and is one of many bogus quotes in the book attributed to Israeli leaders. According to Schoenman’s footnote, the quote by Heilbrun was hearsay relayed to him in private conversations: Cited by Fouzi El-Asmar and Salih Baransi during discussions with the author, October 1983 Needless to say, Schoenman’s scholarship, upon which many anti-Israel Web sites depend, leaves much wanting. CAMERA contacted former Mayor Lahat who attested that he has never employed, known or heard of any such person as “Chairman Heilbrun,” and that the reported incident never took place. Lahat also emphasized that he would never allow any of his employees to make such statements, as it completely contradicts his own sentiments about Palestinians. Summary: Fabricated quote, fabricated source   Media Monitors (http://www.mediamonitors.net) An article archived on the Media Monitors Web site is filled with questionable assertions and bogus quotes (some of which were debunked in Part I.) The following quote (which also appears on the MIFTAH Web site) was attributed to Israeli Northern District Commissioner Israel Koenig, supposedly from his controversial report on Israeli Arabs in Galilee: We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population. Source given: Cited in Lustick, Ian, Arabs in the Jewish State, University of Texas Press, Texas, 1980. Investigation: Neither the source given (Ian Lustick's Arabs in the Jewish State) nor the actual report itself  contains any mention of "terror, assassination, intimidation or land confiscation".  The Koenig Report or “memorandum” as it is sometimes referred to, was a private document of recommendations written in 1975 by civil servant Israel Koenig, the Interior Ministry’s official in charge of the Galilee, to alter the demographic balance of the region in favor of the Jews. The recommendations were rejected by then Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin, denounced by senior Cabinet ministers and rued by then foreign minister Yigal Alon who expressed great regret that the recommendations were ever written. It provoked controversy within Israel after being leaked to Al Hamishmar, the publication of Israel’s Marxist party, Mapam. Koenig’s recommendations included expanding and strengthening Israel’s Jewish presence in the Galilee, applying legal consequences to Arabs expressing hostility toward the state and Zionism, enforcing tax collection from the Arab sector, cutting family subsidies to Arabs with large families, eliminating preferential acceptance of Arabs into Israeli universities, channeling Arab students into studying the physical and natural sciences rather than humanities, and encouraging young Arabs to study abroad and emigrate. As controversial as Koenig’s proposals were at the time, however, there was absolutely no suggestion of using "terror," "assassination," "intimidation" or "land confiscations." Summary: Fabricated quote, false source    Robert Fisk According to Fisk’s article: [Arafat] is chastised by George Bush while his people are bestialised by the Israeli leadership. Rafael Eytan [sic], the former Israeli chief of staff, used to talk of the Palestinians as "cockroaches in a glass jar". Menachem Begin called them “two-legged beasts”… These quotes appear on numerous anti-Israel Web sites, raising the question of whether Fisk obtained his information on one of the sites that share his agenda. While there is some truth to these quotes, they are either distorted or taken out of context. Investigation--Example 1: Fisk suggests that Eitan routinely referred to the Palestinians as “cockroaches” He states this as fact, giving no source, but other internet sites refer to an April 13, 1983 article by Gad Becker in the Israeli daily, Yediot Ahronot. This original source of the quote, however, indicates that Eitan’s comment was atypical, made in specific reference to Arab violence. According to Becker, this “uncharacteristic”(as he puts it) and controversial comment was made by outgoing Chief of Staff Eitan during a discussion of how best to deal with Arab violence in the West Bank. In responding to suggestions by Knesset members that the army should stop stone throwers by shooting at their feet or throwing stones back, Eitan reportedly said: The Arabs will never win over us by throwing stones. Our response must be a nationalist Zionist response. For every stone that’s thrown–we will build ten settlements. If 100 settlements will exist–and they will–between Nablus and Jerusalem, stones will not be thrown. If this will be the situation, then the Arabs will only be able to scurry around like drugged roaches in a bottle. Summary: A single (albeit controversial) remark made in a specific context is misrepresented as a generalized, routine slur by an Israeli leader Investigation--Example 2: Internet hate sites, as well as Fisk, attribute this derogation of Palestnians as “two-legged beasts” to former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. The source generally given is: Menachem Begin, as quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the Beasts,"New Statesman, June 25, 1982 Indeed, the radical French-Israeli journalist, Amnon Kapeliouk, did attribute such a quote to Begin in his New Statesman article criticizing Israel’s invasion of Lebanon. The author posited: For this reason the government has gone to extraordinary lengths to dehumanise the Palestinians. Begin described them in a speech in the Knesset as "beasts walking on two legs". However, further investigation by CAMERA reveals that the actual speech upon which Kapeliouk based his quote, as well as news reports at the time demonstrate that the journalist distorted the quote, giving it a completely different tone and meaning. Begin was talking, not about "the Palestinians" but about terrorists who target children within Israel. On June 8, 1982, Begin addressed the Knesset in response to a no-confidence motion over Israel's invasion of Lebanon. He talked about defending the children of Israel, and according to a June 9, 1982 AP report, “his voice quaver[ed] with anger and sadness.” According to the minutes of the session, Begin stated: The children of Israel will happily go to school and joyfully return home, just like the children in Washington, in Moscow, and in Peking, in Paris and in Rome, in Oslo, in Stockholm and in Copenhagen. The fate of... Jewish children has been different from all the children of the world throughout the generations. No more. We will defend our children. If the hand of any two-footed animal is raised against them, that hand will be cut off, and our children will grow up in joy in the homes of their parents. Kapeliouk neither recanted nor apologized for his deception. Summary: Distortion by an Israeli critic of a Begin speech discussing terrorism and terrorists. For more on false Zionist quotes, click here. Also check out CAMERA's "Urban Myths and Misquotes"

I've read his speech in full when you hadn't read it at all. So much for your history degree then.

Run for cover Didge with a tidal wave of stuff from the internet but that doesn't change a thing.

There was no threat from Egypt in the six day war.

Begin said so.

Belatucadros wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:


So you are denying the words recorded from Ergot then, how is that possible Irn?
You were well wrong as how can your hoice be so utterly wrong to recorded history.
Talk about clutching at straws, as again are you denying any of the words spoken?

Didge old bean. Did Egypt follow through on any of these words that you have dragged from the internet?

There was no threat from Egypt at the time of the six day war so the guy Harris is wrong isn't he?

I was right - Israel started the six day war with no threat from Egypt. Begin the Israeli prime minister said so. He was just being honest so why can't you?

You are wrong as per usual, you are going off the words later said years after, ignoring all threats and troops built up top attack and all the evidence they were going to attack and again they later did again. What you offer is pure babble, based off the words you badly misquite, Thatis your only defense.
Anything else ha ha

The Israeli prime minister is a liar then?

Oh dear- your digging an even deeper hole than you are in now.

Want a spade

Sorry that does not cut it Irn, that is your only defense and its very poor ignoring everything that built up before, you need to do better than that as again you are trying to distort history.
Claiming there was no thread from Egypt is a complete lie as all evidence points to the opposite.

Irn Bru wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:



You are wrong as per usual, you are going off the words later said years after, ignoring all threats and troops built up top attack and all the evidence they were going to attack and again they later did again. What you offer is pure babble, based off the words you badly misquite, Thatis your only defense.
Anything else ha ha

The Israeli prime minister is a liar then?

Oh dear- your digging an even deeper hole than you are in now.

Want a spade

Well its funny how your whole defense hinges on the words of one man, whee as I have countless words showing the opposite.
How much does thatmake you look a twat

Belatucadros wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

The Israeli prime minister is a liar then?

Oh dear- your digging an even deeper hole than you are in now.

Want a spade

Well its funny how your whole defense hinges on the words of one man, whee as I have countless words showing the opposite.
How much does thatmake you look a twat

Unfortunately for you, Begin was the man who made the decision, so his words are the only ones that matter.

risingsun wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:



Well its funny how your whole defense hinges on the words of one man, whee as I have countless words showing the opposite.
How much does thatmake you look a twat

Unfortunately for you, Begin was the man who made the decision, so his words are the only ones that matter.

Really sassy, you need to read the facts, so again poor Irn and you are ignoring history and like this states you try to distort it.

risingsun wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

The Israeli prime minister is a liar then?

Oh dear- your digging an even deeper hole than you are in now.

Want a spade

Well its funny how your whole defense hinges on the words of one man, whee as I have countless words showing the opposite.
How much does thatmake you look a twat

Unfortunately for you, Begin was the man who made the decision, so his words are the only ones that matter.

Correct. If the Israeli prime minster says it then there is no doubt that the threat from Egypt didn't exist and Israel attacked them.

Didge is a coward.

Belatucadros wrote:

risingsun wrote:

Unfortunately for you, Begin was the man who made the decision, so his words are the only ones that matter.

Really sassy, you need to read the facts, so again poor Irn and you are ignoring history and like this states you try to distort it.

Who made the decision? Begin did, so his words are the only ones that have any relevance.

He made the decision to preempt again being attacked.Both you and Irn ignore all the words from everyone else but take his words on one speech, how ironic. Your whole argument hinges on this one speech, yet ignores all others and shows how irrational that is. It means you both choose what you want to believe. You ignore how not once but twice Israel has been attacked by this nations and with the vow to wipe them out and with also never accepting their existence. It is the worst kind of apologist bullshit you will find from two lefties who ignore all history