The questions were asked because I knew for almost definite that CarolC would not come anywhere close to divulging the truth, mainly because it blows rather large holes in her arguement.

Nice try. No cigar.

The Jaffa Riots - Lies deliberately told by Arab religious leaders about Jewish attacks and the murder of helpless Arabs by the Jews told in order to provoke and inflame the Arab population. Actual truth was that there had been no murders had there CarolC? There had been no attacks had there CarolC. But Arabs did kill and injure Jews in the process of driving them from their homes and looting their property didn't they CarolC. Up until this point there had been no attacks.

More lies, Teribus.

The riots started when two different Jewish groups, one Socialist, and one Communist who were demonstrating, started fighting with each other. Arab Muslims and Christians started helping the police to break up the fights. Arabs in other areas misinterpreted what was going on and they jumped in thinking that Arabs were being attacked, but the Haycroft Commission of Inquiry Report into the Jaffa riots stated that the argument made by some Jews that the cause of the riots was propaganda spread by Arab leaders was not what happened. The report outlined the causes as being discontent with the government in part due to its policy on the Jewish national home, partly to Arab misunderstandings about the policy, and partly because of the manner in which that policy was interpreted 'by some of its advocates outside the government'. It further reported that there was 'no evidence worth considering' that the Jaffa riots were planned

The Commission of Inquiry listed the grievances of the Arabs that led to their feelings of frustration...

1. When Great Britain took over administration of Palestine, it was led by the Zionists to adopt a policy mainly directed towards the establishment of a national home for the Jews, and not to the equal benefit of all Palestinians.

2. In persuance of this policy, the government of Palestine had an official advisory body - the Zionist Commission - which placed the interests of the Jews above all others.

3. There was an undue proportion of Jews in the government.

4. Part of the Zionist program was to flood the country with people who possessed greater commercial and organizing ability which would eventually lead to their gaining the upper hand over the rest of the population.

5. The immigrants were an economic danger to the country because of their competition, and because they were favored in this competition.

6. Immigrants offended the Arabs by their arrogance and by their contempt of Arab social prejudices.

7. Owing to insufficient precautions, Bolshevik immigrants were allowed into the country leading to social and economic unrest in Palestine.

The report also said that the Arabs regarded Jewish immigration not only as an ultimate means to subject the Arabs politically and economically, but also as an immediate cause of Arab unemployment. The commission noted that the Arabs were aware that Jewish predominence was envisaged not only by Jewish extremists, but also by the responsible representatives of Zionism.

Captain Brunton of General Staff Intelligence had this to say about it...

"nothing short of bitter and widespread hostility and the Arab population has some (cause?) to regard the Zionists with hatred and the British with resentment. Mr. Churchill's visit put the final touch to the picture. He upheld the Zionist cause and treated the Arab demands like those of negligible opposition to be put off by a few political phrases and treated like children".

This is what the Arabs had to say about what was being done to them in their own country...

"the Jews have been granted a true advantage, namely that of becoming our rulers. We are to have equal rights of justice with them before theLaw, but they are to have in addition to this the preference in politics and in the economic life of the country, of which the Mandate has seen fit to deprive us.

This was Mr. Churchill's response to the Arabs, and it's a big part of why they were so pissed off. He bluntly informed the Arab leaders that British policy would not change, that it was not in his power to change it, and that even if it were, it was not his wish to do so. Everything I said in my previous post is supported by history and by the facts.


The Jewish villages that were attacked in the Tel Hai incident, that CarolC dismisses as a product of bone-headed stupidity, were attacked by who CarolC? British troops? French troops? Or was it by Nomadic Arab Tribesmen?

It was nomadic Arab tribesmen. These tribesmen, by the way saw themselves living in what was supposed to be a part of the French mandate, and they were not happy about the fact that the Jewish settlers were trying to get their villages absorbed into the British mandate.

It was the latter wasn't it CarolC? How many of them died CarolC? They did succeed in driving the Jewish villagers from their homes in three out of the four villages but at the fourth Tel Hai they stood and fought back. CarolC won't tell you any of this because those nice Palestinian Arabs wouldn't dream about doing anything like that, such an act would be completely beyond them

Please read what I already wrote.I certainly never suggested that it wasn't Arabs who the villagers in Tel Hai were fighting with, nor that Arabs have never killed any Jews.

At the Passover Festival in Jerusalem it was the same story again wasn't it CarolC? Only difference this time it was on a much larger scale wasn't it? They whipped up and inflamed a crowd of between 160,000 and 200,000 Arabs and set them loose to plunder and burn Jewish property. All of it based on lies deliberately told to cause unrest.

As you said, these riots were instigated by the Mufti, Haj Amin, who was put into his position of power by Herbert Samuel, against the wishes of the majority of Arabs at the time. The Mufti also killed a lot of Arabs who tried to resist what he was doing, so the Arabs were victims three times over because of Mr. Samuel installing Haj Amin into his position of power. In the first instance, when their own preferences were overriden when Haj Amin was installed. Then they also were victimized when they resisted him. Then they were victimized when they were (and continue to be) blamed for the things that Haj Amin did against the wishes of the majority of them, like you're doing right now, especially when you try to make it look like his being in league with Hitler is a reflection on Palestinians generally. The fact is that many Palestinians fought on the side of the allies, and very few aligned themselves with the Nazis.

The fact that Herbert Samuel's installing Haj Amin in a position of power has given people like you and the government of Israel a hell of a lot of pretext to try to justify Israel's practice of ethnic cleansing suggests to me that this was his reason for putting Haj Amin in that position of power in the first place. So that makes the Palestinians four times victimized by what Herbert Samuel did. And all of the Jews who were killed during the 1929 riots were victims of Mr. Herbert Samuel's decision as well.