1 No it's not just me saying that . The US was hostile because they didn't really support Israel at the time. They didn't want to have to use force to enforce the partition plan and Truman was left in no doubt as to how he wouldn't be getting elected for a second term if he didn't support the Zionists<quoted text>
2 No, why would you say that. What I said was that the Palestinians had obviously seen how the Jews operated and decided that what was good for the goose was good for the gander.
3.No that is not correct for a long time I supported the Israelis and Israel and yet by doing further reading I changed my opinion. Even a lot of Jewish rabbis do not support what Israel has done
4. The land belonged to the Arabs and whilst I don't agree with their outlook on life it is up to them how they run their countries
5. In relation to Jordon and Syria. There was agreement on both side re the rulers and the British. That cannot be said in relation to the Arabs and the British re Palestine
The fact that it was translated by a Palestinian site does not decrease its credibility just yours
The people who were living in Palestine had inalienable rights because they were born there and possession is 9/10 of the law. The migrants from Europe who were not born there had no credibility or rights re land that did not belong to them. Imagine today if someone came along to somebody elses homeland and decided to take it for themselves because over 2000 years ago their parents had lived there. I don't think so!!!!!!!!!!