I provided multiple examples of fighting on Israeli territory by Arab armies, inconsistent with "only defend Palestinian land" (as defined by the U.N. mandate).

Is it really the case that you can't even notice when facts are provided?! You might think I'm mistaken about the facts, but you can't say I didn't even offer them. (You might say I'm wrong about the facts, if you think so.)

Since I may have overstated the "destroyed Degania Aref" point--I don't know the condition of the city after shelling, infiltration, and ultimate defeat of the Syrian army--here's a link to one example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_the_Kinarot_Valley

Is this not on Israeli territory, as per U.N. mandate?

Do you deny that Egypt bombed Tel Aviv from the air? How is that "only defending Palestinian land", unless everything is Palestinian land?

My complaint about biased sources is based on the fact that your material is from a source that announces itself as biased! "Our Roots are Still Alive: the Story of the Palestinian People" is clearly taking a particular perspective. If I were quoting from Arthur Hertzberg's The Zionist Idea of course that would be presumtively (and announcedly) biased also.

Regarding Israel responding to criticism from the United States and other allies, Obama made clear enough that he disapproved of Israel's actions in the 2008-9 Gaza invasion ("deeply concerned" is pretty close to a slap in the face): https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN06437468/. Given that the IDF started a unilateral ceasefire just two days before Obama took office, I'd say this is a pretty good candidate.

I do believe we had better stop, though. If you cannot recognize titles like "Our Side of the Conflict" as presumptively biased, and you cannot recognize a statement of fact when one is made, there isn't much point attempting a discourse.