[pugsville]

The Zionists were able to chose their own leaders and institutions. And a more or less united leadership was a great asset in the conflict. The British did not allow representative institutions for the Arabs (the proposed Arab agency would have members appointed) interfered with what elections there were and the chose of leadership. This is clearly favourable treatment for the Zionists.

The Zionists were gaining in strength through immigration. Restrictions just controlled have slowly the Palestinians were losing. It was not a stable status quo. The Palestinians were faced with a British Mandate Authority that was allowing the Zionists to grow in strength, Zionists who wanted to take over the entire mandate. They was no hope of fair dealing by the British. What other choice did the Palestinians have other than Revolt? '

for some detail how the British Mandate authority favoured Zionist Businesses over Palestinians.

http://content.lib.utah.edu/utils/getfi ... e/2511.pdf

[wat0n]

The Zionists were able to chose their own leaders and institutions. And a more or less united leadership was a great asset in the conflict. The British did not allow representative institutions for the Arabs (the proposed Arab agency would have members appointed) interfered with what elections there were and the chose of leadership. This is clearly favourable treatment for the Zionists.

And yet, whenever anti-British Zionists formed political organizations, they were promptly banned. If anything the above only shows that the freedom to choose political leaders would be respected as long as those leaders supported the UK. As such, the only reason the Jewish Agency was not intervened was that its leadership generally supported British geopolitical goals.

The Zionists were gaining in strength through immigration. Restrictions just controlled have slowly the Palestinians were losing. It was not a stable status quo. The Palestinians were faced with a British Mandate Authority that was allowing the Zionists to grow in strength, Zionists who wanted to take over the entire mandate. They was no hope of fair dealing by the British. What other choice did the Palestinians have other than Revolt? '

They could have cooperated with the British to reach an accommodation, for instance. Launching the revolt only set their cause back even more.

for some detail how the British Mandate authority favoured Zionist Businesses over Palestinians.

http://content.lib.utah.edu/utils/getfi ... e/2511.pdf

Interesting, care to provide some examples we can discuss? The author suggests this was often an unintended consequence of British policy in the introduction.

In the case of the Haifa port, from what I can see, the British explicitly justified to the obligation to build a Jewish National Home, yes, but as an excuse to leave non-British businesses out of the operation.