Can you cite any terror acts carried out by Haganah?
What a very carefully phrased question. Something the Iranian government would likely ask "Can you cite any terror acts that we have carried out?"
You mentioned Haganah specifically, citing its foundation of the IDF as the reason for continuity. So I asked about Haganah. For the record, I fully consider Palmach part of Haganah, and would love to hear terror acts done by it in this reference, too.
If you didn't want to be asked this specifically, you shouldn't have phrased your accusation in this way.
Fortunately, it's easy to point out where the Haganah actively and directly used terrorism to achieve its goals - try learning about the SS Patria.
From Merriam Webster:
Terrorism(n): the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal
Can you explain what an operation designed to prevent a ship filled with refugees from leaving, but ended up killing them by mistake has to do with terrorism?
Read up on their Palmach unit.
I know about Palmach. Again, I'd like you to be specific, because it seems our understanding of what constitute proof is vastly different.
Learn what happened after Ben Gurion's famous October 1st (1945) decision.
I see it as one army fighting another. I understand you don't. Personally, I think you'd be hard pressed to convince people that military actions, directed solely against military targets, and attempting to avoid hurting civilians where possible are "terrorism". If you do not agree with that, you will find that every single army in the world that has ever participated in any armed conflict is a terrorist. I doubt that's where you're heading.
By the way, were you aware that the Haganah explicitly approved the bombing of the Hotel David? Explicit as in "carry out the operation" explicit.
Are you aware that the hotel was the British army's headquarters (thus, a legitimate military target)? Are you aware that an advance warning was given (though not properly passed through and acted upon) in order to minimize casualties? Again, it's a hard press to call attacking a military target "terrorism".
The bombing of ships known to be carrying deportees, and the bombing of civilian facilities (e.g. King David Hotel) is the foundation of modern terrorism - ironically adopted by the very people the State of Israel displaced and marginalized.
Aside from the flaws I already mentioned in this argument, it is simply false. The foundations of modern terrorism is targeting civilians, striking targets based on affiliation rather than military relevance, indoctrinating populations that death is a high cause, and that achieving it for both yourself and your enemy is worth more than preserving and cultivating life.
You are correct that these foundations are found in actions carried out in Palestine as far back as the early 20th century. You are, however, missing the culprit. Firing at civilian buses merely because its occupants are Jews and accidentally killing an innocent, unrelated Arab with a bomb, and then declaring him Shahid are actions that Arab radicals in Palestine were doing well before the 1930's. These are the foundations of modern terrorism.
In other words, perhaps you should learn a little bit more about what happened before.
That's what my previous reply was meant to be. You were specifying actions I was not aware of, and I asked for citations. Turns out, I disagree with your analysis (or, possibly, you were more ignorant on those matters than you thought you were). There is no reason to sound smug about your answer. This is how discussion is supposed to go.