The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJonathan Cook Archive
How Israel Wages War on Palestinian History
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

When the Palestinian actor Mohammed Bakri made a documentary about Jenin in 2002 – filming immediately after the Israeli army had completed rampaging through the West Bank city, leaving death and destruction in its wake – he chose an unusual narrator for the opening scene: a mute Palestinian youth.

Jenin had been sealed off from the world for nearly three weeks as the Israeli army razed the neighbouring refugee camp and terrorised its population.

Bakri’s film Jenin, Jenin shows the young man hurrying silently between wrecked buildings, using his nervous body to illustrate where Israeli soldiers shot Palestinians and where bulldozers collapsed homes, sometimes on their inhabitants.

It was not hard to infer Bakri’s larger meaning: when it comes to their own story, Palestinians are denied a voice. They are silent witnesses to their own and their people’s suffering and abuse.

The irony is that Bakri has faced just such a fate himself since Jenin, Jenin was released 18 years ago. Today, little is remembered of his film, or the shocking crimes it recorded, except for the endless legal battles to keep it off screens.

Bakri has been tied up in Israel’s courts ever since, accused of defaming the soldiers who carried out the attack. He has paid a high personal price. Deaths threats, loss of work and endless legal bills that have near-bankrupted him. A verdict in the latest suit against him – this time backed by the Israeli attorney general – is expected in the next few weeks.

Bakri is a particularly prominent victim of Israel’s long-running war on Palestinian history. But there are innumerable other examples.

For decades many hundreds of Palestinian residents in the southern West Bank have been fighting their expulsion as Israeli officials characterise them as “squatters”. According to Israel, the Palestinians are nomads who recklessly built homes on land they seized inside an army firing zone.

The villagers’ counter-claims were ignored until the truth was unearthed recently in Israel’s archives.

These Palestinian communities are, in fact, marked on maps predating Israel. Official Israeli documents presented in court last month show that Ariel Sharon, a general-turned-politician, devised a policy of establishing firing zones in the occupied territories to justify mass evictions of Palestinians like these communities in the Hebron Hills.

The residents are fortunate that their claims have been officially verified, even if they still depend on uncertain justice from an Israeli occupiers’ court.

Israel’s archives are being hurriedly sealed up precisely to prevent any danger that records might confirm long-sidelined and discounted Palestinian history.

Last month Israel’s state comptroller, a watchdog body, revealed that more than one million archived documents were still inaccessible, even though they had passed their declassification date. Nonetheless, some have slipped through the net.

The archives have, for example, confirmed some of the large-scale massacres of Palestinian civilians carried out in 1948 – the year Israel was established by dispossessing Palestinians of their homeland.

In one such massacre at Dawaymeh, near where Palestinians are today fighting against their expulsion from the firing zone, hundreds were executed, even as they offered no resistance, to encourage the wider population to flee.

Other files have corroborated Palestinian claims that Israel destroyed more than 500 Palestinian villages during a wave of mass expulsions that same year to dissuade the refugees from trying to return.

Official documents have disproved, too, Israel’s claim that it pleaded with the 750,000 Palestinian refugees to return home. In fact, as the archives reveal, Israel obscured its role in the ethnic cleansing of 1948 by inventing a cover story that it was Arab leaders who commanded Palestinians to leave.

The battle to eradicate Palestinian history does not just take place in the courts and archives. It begins in Israeli schools.

A new study by Avner Ben-Amos, a history professor at Tel Aviv University, shows that Israeli pupils learn almost nothing truthful about the occupation, even though many will soon enforce it as soldiers in a supposedly “moral” army that rules over Palestinians.

Maps in geography textbooks strip out the so-called “Green Line” – the borders demarcating the occupied territories – to present a Greater Israel long desired by the settlers. History and civics classes evade all discussion of the occupation, human rights violations, the role of international law, or apartheid-like local laws that treat Palestinians differently from Jewish settlers living illegally next door.

Instead, the West Bank is known by the Biblical names of “Judea and Samaria”, and its occupation in 1967 is referred to as a “liberation”.

Sadly, Israel’s erasure of Palestinians and their history is echoed outside by digital behemoths such as Google and Apple.

Palestinian solidarity activists have spent years battling to get both platforms to include hundreds of Palestinian communities in the West Bank missed off their maps, under the hashtag #HeresMyVillage. Illegal Jewish settlements, meanwhile, are prioritised on these digital maps.

Another campaign, #ShowTheWall, has lobbied the tech giants to mark on their maps the path of Israel’s 700-kilometre-long steel and concrete barrier, effectively used by Israel to annex occupied Palestinian territory in violation of international law.

And last month Palestinian groups launched yet another campaign, #GoogleMapsPalestine, demanding that the occupied territories be labelled “Palestine”, not just the West Bank and Gaza. The UN recognised the state of Palestine back in 2012, but Google and Apple refused to follow suit.

Palestinians rightly argue that these firms are replicating the kind of disappearance of Palestinians familiar from Israeli textbooks, and that they uphold “mapping segregation” that mirrors Israel’s apartheid laws in the occupied territories.

Today’s crimes of occupation – house demolitions, arrests of activists and children, violence from soldiers, and settlement expansion – are being documented by Israel, just as its earlier crimes were.

Future historians may one day unearth those papers from the Israeli archives and learn the truth. That Israeli policies were not driven, as Israel claims now, by security concerns, but by a colonial desire to destroy Palestinian society and pressure Palestinians to leave their homeland, to be replaced by Jews.

The lessons for future researchers will be no different from the lessons learnt by their predecessors, who discovered the 1948 documents.

But in truth, we do not need to wait all those years hence. We can understand what is happening to Palestinians right now – simply by refusing to conspire in their silencing. It is time to listen.

A version of this article first appeared in the National, Abu Dhabi.

ORDER IT NOW

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His books include “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is www.jonathan-cook.net.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy, History • Tags: Israel/Palestine 
Hide 110 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. If a truthful history of Palestine ultimately emerges, that will be thanks in no small measure to the tireless work of Jonathan Cook. We are all in his debt.

    • Agree: Ann Nonny Mouse
  2. A123 says:

    The idea that violent Shia-stinians are “denied history” is ludicrous.

    UNRWA is the #1 publisher/distributor of their anti-Semitic propaganda. Their idea of history is so bogus that it espouses that Jihadi colonizers are entitled to a judenfrei land from “the river to the sea”.

    It may continue to limp along for a bit grovelling and begging for UNRWA handouts. However, without support from bankrupt Iran, the violent Shia-stine movement will no longer have the resources to push their fictional narrative and false history.

    PEACE 😇

    • Troll: Ann Nonny Mouse
    • Replies: @Lot
    , @Svigor
    , @Clyde
    , @Wizard of Oz
  3. This is a very illuminating and surely accurate account of current history that we are not allowed to read and know. Thank you Jonathan Cook, the fact that you are living in occupied Nazareth, and telling the tale of the silenced and brutalized Palestinian people hanging on the best they can in the Zionist gestapo state (gestapo is surely an understatement here) and demonstrates your personal courage, which has been lacking in the US for a long time.

    The total black-out on the violent and discriminatory rule that the Zionist entity has imposed on the Palestinian people needs to be broken to let the light of truth shine in on this tragedy. The barbarism of Israel in its creation and continuing till this very moment in Palestine has been largely excised from our MSM news and allowed historical perception of this long running conflict.

    The Israeli so-called independence struggle was basically another grand massacre of the generally peaceful and welcoming indigenous peoples, who failed to pass the grade of having either the right color, religion, language or ethnicity for the Imperial backed Western settler colonialists arriving to find their promise in the land.

    In this case, the natives were not of the right tribal background (even though probably more descendent from the Ancient Israelites than the New Israelites) to make its as a Chosenite, where only European Zionized Jews need bother to apply.

    Unfortunately, in our dystopian US, our school children and university students faces a strong indoctrination that begins with the distorted and highly exaggerated Holocaust narrative as a warm-up to the next narrative, of a Jewish independence struggle. Independence or cleaning of the land from natives, who are depicted as bad with agglomerated labels as dark and swarthy, primitive, terroristic and “Islamic,” which translates in Zio-Evangelicalized Post-Christian America as a Mark of the Beast.

    However, Zionist domination of US and generally the Western and increasingly Eastern culture and media, is also a general challenge to mankind and its future as freedom loving and compassionate beings. In the US our dual loyalty and blackmailed Congressional politicians are a major part of the problem, the problem of an uncontrolled bellicose Israeli state. Unfortunately, our US politicians, have the morality and ethical standards beneath used care salesman and street prostitutes (no offense to them), and know whom to prostate themselves to and it ain’t God, Jesus , the Declaration of Independence or the US Constitution.

    The Palestinians will not have any justice or a glimmer of hope for a just and peaceful future as long as the American public remains in its comatose state and is so willing to be led around by the nose from our Zio (i.e. foreign) controlled MSM and its political hacks.

    • Agree: Ann Nonny Mouse
    • Replies: @Eliza
  4. Lot says:
    @A123

    Yep, “Palestinians are denied a voice” is pure stupidity. No “oppressed” group in the world has more advocates.

    • Agree: Mr. Grey, A123
    • Troll: Ann Nonny Mouse
    • Replies: @AnonStarter
    , @Svigor
  5. Brewer says:

    According to the Arab League Declaration to the U.N. on 15 May 1948, 250,000 Palestinians had already been expelled amid massacre and rape before the League entered the territory on that day.
    Rosemarie M. Esber (Phd London, Johns Hopkins) did extensive research finding that figure to be 440,000. – Under the Cover of War: The Zionist Expulsion of the Palestinians (2008, Arabicus Books)

    The Zionist’s own document (revealed by Benny Morris), entitled “The emigration of Palestinian Arabs in the period 1/12/1947-1/6/1948,” dated 30 June 1948, reads:”At least 55% of the total of the exodus was caused by our (Haganah/IDF) operations. To this figure, the report’s compilers add the operations of the Irgun and Lehi, which “directly (caused) some 15%… of the emigration.” A further 2% was attributed to explicit expulsion orders issued by Israeli troops, and 1% to their psychological warfare. This leads to a figure of 73% for departures caused directly by the Israelis. In addition, the report attributes 22% of the departures to “fears” and “a crisis of confidence” affecting the Palestinian population. As for Arab calls for flight, these were reckoned to be significant in only 5% of cases.”

    Note that these documents refer to expulsions before the “War” began. It confirms that the policy of entering defenseless homes with machine guns and grenades with the express purpose of expelling the indigenous people of Palestine was a deliberate, planned crime against Humanity. Case closed.

    The case against the crimes committed subsequent to the expulsions – the deliberate falsification of the Historical record, the massive propaganda effort to blame the Palestinian people for their own Nakba, not only remains open, it is an ongoing, disgraceful policy of the criminal enterprise known as Israel.

  6. Official documents have disproved, too, Israel’s claim that it pleaded with the 750,000 Palestinian refugees to return home. In fact, as the archives reveal, Israel obscured its role in the ethnic cleansing of 1948 by inventing a cover story that it was Arab leaders who commanded Palestinians to leave.

    Seth Anziska translated a report located in Israel’s state archives, dated June 30, 1948, which details and analyzes the causes of “Arab migration.” Considering the source, it’s a real eye-opener. The author concludes the following concerning “orders and directives issued by Arab institutions and gangs”:

    … [T]his element did not have decisive weight, and its impact amounts to some 5% of all villages having been evacuated for this reason.

    This statement alone collapses the hasbara regarding Arab leaders. The report readily acknowledges that the primary causes of the Nakba were of Israeli origin. It’s available here:

    https://www.palestine-studies.org/sites/default/files/attachments/jps-articles/JPS193_15_Anziska%20source.pdf

    Contemporary Israeli officials openly acknowledge their effort to eliminate archival evidence even when it has already been referenced in widely-published material:

    https://www.palestine-studies.org/sites/default/files/attachments/jps-articles/JPS193_05_Anziska.pdf

    In an interview with Ha’aretz, Yehiel Horev—the former head of the Malmab department tasked with censoring material—was asked why material was systematically hidden, especially when several key documents had already been cited in a variety of published historical works. “Isn’t concealing documents based on footnotes in books an attempt to lock the barn door after the horses have bolted?” the interviewer asked. In his response, Horev made a case for undermining evidence and attacking the very concept of truth.“If someone writes that the horse is black, if the horse isn’t outside the barn, you can’t prove that it’s really black.”20

  7. @Lot

    No “oppressed” group in the world has more advocates.

    So that’s why Israel is so keen on passing anti-BDS laws that undermine the First Amendment and waging concerted campaigns to deprive anti-zionists of social media platforms: because Palestinians already have too many advocates.

    Thanks for sharing that.

    • LOL: A123
    • Replies: @A123
  8. Excellent resource:

    Palestine Open Maps

    https://palopenmaps.org/

  9. A123 says:
    @AnonStarter

    deprive anti-zionists of social media platforms

    ROTFL….

    NonStarter. Only you would intentionally reverse things 180 degrees.

    Social media platforms are deluged with anti-Semitic posters and nothing is done about it. Protests are required to get these media firms to make the smallest of steps.

    Muslim hate is so omnipresent on Twitter that Jews & Christians have to track it on a daily basis:

    https://twitter.com/hashtag/nosafespaceforjewhate

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  10. Ram says:

    The fake Hebrews need to be evicted from Palestine, to Washington DC.

    • Agree: Ann Nonny Mouse
  11. Chris Moore says: • Website

    Jewry has formidable propaganda apparatus, from the Middle East to the United States. It uses the same Zionist blueprint wherever it roosts: play the victim, defame the majority, divide and rule. And the same corrupt and scummy type of people collaborate with it wherever it sets up shop.

  12. A123 says:
    @AnonStarter

    NonStarter,

    If Jews are so powerful:

    — Why is anti-Semitism not being reported by the Fake Stream Media?
    — Why do universities allow violence and intimidation against Jews? (1)

    Jewish student Rose Ritch’s [forced] resignation from her position as vice president of the student government at the University of Southern California (USC) highlights both the growing level of campus anti-Semitism and also the inadequate responses by campus leadership to appropriately address anti-Semitism.

    Ritch was repeatedly accused by fellow students as being unsuitable for a student government position and that her position as a supporter of Israel made her a “racist.” In turn, an aggressive impeachment campaign was launched against Ritch.

    Ritch repeatedly turned to campus administrators and off campus groups for guidance and support but her requests went unanswered. Lekht points out in her article that Ritch followed official USC protocol when reporting the clear violations of the university’s guidelines by the offenders. Unfortunately, the university failed to hold the students who harassed Ritch responsible nor did USC take adequate steps to ensure Ritch’s safety after threats of physical violence.

    As long as Muslims behave like a Cult, not a religion, they will be treated as a Cult.

    Countering incitement and organization of violence is necessary because of the imminent threats against Christians and Jews. U.S. Restrictions will continue to tighten as needed to contain violent Islam. Self-defense against irrational Jihadi Death Cultists is a Right.

    PEACE 😇
    _______

    (1) https://combatantisemitism.org/latest-news/usc-falls-short-after-jewish-students-resignation/

  13. Brewer says:
    @A123

    What exactly does your post regarding antisemitism have to do with the topic, ie. Israel’s deliberate concealment of History?
    If, as it seems, the intention is to persuade readers that so-called “antisemitism” (a rather problematic concept logically speaking) somehow excuses the crimes committed by the Zionist state then I have to inform you that it certainly does not.
    Furthermore, it lessens the viability of the term itself which has already become rather impotent due to efforts to conflate criticism of Israel’s activities with a personal form of racism – a non sequitur.
    Most significant however is the fact that your post illustrates that you do not have any counter facts to offer on this topic.
    Reduced to its logical bare bones in this context, your post seems to say: “Expelling Palestinians from their homes amid massacre and rape is OK because someone spoke nastily to a Jewish person”.

    • Replies: @A123
  14. Eliza says:
    @Tommy Thompson

    Tommy – Well said.

    As you say, European Jews were preferred over Arabic Jews but only until it became clear that not enough European Jews would choose to resettle in Palestine/Israel rather than in the USA or other western liberal state. Zionism then worked its magic and these Israeli Jewish Arabs began shouting ‘Death to Arabs’.

    Israel seeks to ‘disappear’ the Palestinian people, their history and even their physical presence on the land by way of the destruction of their ancient olive groves, amongst other things. Kudos to Jonathon Cook for his tireless work and refusal to allow the injustice of Zionism to remain unreported.

  15. Israel’s water boy at UR doesn’t respond well to reason. Good sense be damned, he’ll now accuse you of being a card-carrying member of ISIS who carves his steak with a scimitar while dining at the Ritz-Carlton with George Soros.

    Sometimes it’s entertaining to see just how indescribably stupid he’ll get. You’ll discover in short order that the best you can do is deftly poke a hole in his commentary and let him “laugh” like an inpatient at Bellevue whose regular shot of thorazine is eight hours overdue.

    More often, he’s best ignored.

  16. A123 says:
    @Brewer

    What exactly does your post regarding antisemitism have to do with the topic, ie. Israel’s deliberate concealment of History?

    The topic is actually about the Muslim Occupiers of Judea & Samaria trying to construct a false narrative to justify their colonization of non-Muslim lands. Their Jihadi goal is to achieve dominance through fiction.

    Lying is a core Muslim value known as Taqiyya or Kithman (1)

    the Islamic combat tactic of taqiyya (pronounced tuh-KEE-uh). LEARN THIS WORD. The future of western civilization hangs on it. Taqiyya is the islamic command to LIE TO INFIDELS. This command is especially pronounced for muslims engaged in jihad

    {koran 3:54} They plotted and schemed, but so did allah, and allah is the best schemer.

    quote from the famous imam Al-Ghazali, who is the muslim equivalent of Thomas Aquinas. Ghazali is totally down with any lying that results in attaining a goal – ANY goal:
    “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible. Know this that lying is not sin by itself, but if it brings harm to you it could be ugly. However, you can lie if that will keep you from evil or if it will result in prosperity.”

    Notice how a certain deceptive Muslim poster tries to drag the discussion away from the root causes of the problem:
    — Muslim violence towards infidels
    — Muslim theft & colonization of non-Muslim land
    — Muslim lying about being violent

    Fortunately, his inept efforts at Taqiyya deception are painfully obvious and everyone thinks he is a joke. I have not blocked him, because the comic relief he provides is entertainment. He does not realize that he decimated his own position by posting a list of links proving there is a massive amount of Muslim violence against Jews.

    PEACE 😇
    _______

    (1) https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2011/03/02/shariah-comes-to-washington-dc-taqiyya-kithman-by-ann-barnhardt/

    • Replies: @Brewer
    , @Ilya G Poimandres
  17. Brewer says:
    @A123

    The topic is actually about the Muslim Occupiers of Judea & Samaria

    Article title:

    “How Israel Wages War on Palestinian History”

    OK. Got it. You’re a troll.
    Bye.

    • Thanks: AnonStarter
    • LOL: A123
  18. @A123

    Despite the above, we find that in certain circumstances it is permissible or even commendable to lie. The reason for this is12 that the biblical commandment against lying only includes a lie that will be harmful to someone else, as the verse says: “Distance yourself from words of falsehood; do not kill an innocent or righteous man.” That is, it is forbidden to lie in a way that might cause death or harm to any person.

    https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1049008/jewish/Telling-the-Truth-and-When-It-Is-Permissible-to-Be-Less-Than-Honest.htm

    Judaism has its own Taqqiya, and what is ‘beneficial’ is always subjective. If the goy is an animal, lying to them for the sake of Jews is beneficial.

    You are right of course, lies are the beginning of every error/sin, but don’t make it out like Muslims are the only faithful to practice it.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
    , @A123
  19. @Ilya G Poimandres

    You do understand why this subject was raised, no? When it’s a Muslim who so easily snuffs out the usual suspects’ flamebait, his entire character has to be impugned, hence the typical shrieks of “Liar! Liar!”

    It’s a transparent attempt to shut down any discussion before it begins: Islam says lying is okay, therefore we can’t trust a thing Muslims say. Problem solved.

    Are lies the beginning of every error/sin? According to Kant, you’d be an immoral miscreant if you lied to a hit man seeking a victim whose hiding place you knew. You’re entirely welcome to those kind of ethics, which appear to be primarily European in origin. Perhaps that explains why the west is now nothing more than a golem in the service of Israel: its naive comprehension of ethics has been its undoing, making it fertile ground for pretense and subterfuge of the Jewish variety.

    In any event, here’s a relatively brief explanation of a commonplace Islamic perspective:

    https://abuaminaelias.com/muslims-allowed-to-lie-taqiyya/

    Bediuzzaman Said Nursi went even further, stating in no uncertain terms that lying was no longer permissible in our contemporary world. His Risale-i Nur is the most influential Islamic text in Turkey, second only to The Qur’an itself.

    • Thanks: Ilya G Poimandres
  20. A123 says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    You are right of course, lies are the beginning of every error/sin, but don’t make it out like Muslims are the only faithful to practice it.

    Of course. However, do not create a false equivalency that all lies are equal. Muslim followers of Allah intentionally lie to justify murder. You do not find this behaviour in religions that follow God.

    Consider these objectively true facts:

    — Jihadi colonizers had not yet reached Jerusalem when Muhammad died.
    — The Western mosque (al’Aqsa) based on Muhammad’s movements is 100% provably in the wrong place. It should be further East, in modern day Jordan or possibly Syria.
    — Jerusalem is holy to only two faiths, Judaism and Christianity.

    The Islamic Occupation of Judea & Samaria is founded on provable Muslim lies. Yet, violent Muslims still fantasize about exterminating millions of Jews based on these lies. Israel did not start with walls. Violent Islam made the walls nescessary.

    When Muslims stop lying and accept the truth, a peaceful deal can be made. Relocating al’Aqsa and the descendants of Jihadi Colonizers to a historically accurate location would end the conflict.

    PEACE 😇

  21. gay troll says:
    @A123

    If a Jew has a problem with “anti Semitism” he could always renounce his filthy religion and join the human race. Because there is no such thing as Jewish blood, there are only Jewish beliefs. “Anti Judaism” is the accurate term and there is a reason Jews refuse to employ it. Because they are the ones claiming racial supremacy and encouraging all other races to think in racial terms.

  22. gay troll says:
    @A123

    Muslim followers of Allah intentionally lie to justify murder. You do not find this behaviour in religions that follow God.

    LOL of day, you get a troll sticker.

  23. I remember Jenin, when the Palestinians launched the 2nd intifada, and killed 1000 Israelis in Pizza parlor’s that were blown up by suicide bombes, in a rein of terror. The residents of Jenin booby trapped the buildings with explosives, so Israel could not hunt the terrorist.

    Future historians may one day unearth those papers from the Israeli archives and learn the truth. That Israeli policies were not driven, as Israel claims now, by security concerns, but by a colonial desire to destroy Palestinian society and pressure Palestinians to leave their homeland, to be replaced by Jews

    I like to see the secret papers from the Arab league plotting to drive the Jews into the sea. The Palestinian story is an old and fake story. One that is dying a rapid death. The Palestinians were the most coddled people on the planet. Their every need was met by UNRWA a special part of the UN dedicated to the Palestinians. Yassir Arafat met with Bill Clinton more then any other world leader. World leaders would have moved haven and earth for the Palestinians especially the EU. No more. Israel made Arafat a king, gave him Jets and castles, helicopters and compounds, all for nothing. His wife hold up in her Paris bunker with a few billion dollars of the Palestinians money.

    The story is fake because the two state solution is fake. The ending was always about riding the land of Jews for Islam to rule Al Quds. It never had anything to do with land or a people displaced. Nothing. I guess Jonathan Cook should move on to the Muslims in China living in camps, or India’s displacement of Muslims under Modi, because the Palestinian story is history. They lost.

    The Jihad against the Jews is finished. As the oil disappears, Arab leaders will be clamoring to sign up with Israel for economy and technology. No one in Arabia is interest in the resistance of Hezbollah, Hamas. What do they have to offer? No tourist are visiting those towns anytime soon. Maybe in the oil heyday when there was money to burn they could count on a resistance for the Arab street to rally behind. But no longer.

    The writing is clearly on the wall. Israel and the Arabs will make peace without the Palestinian cause. They have to, they cannot survive without it.

  24. @A123

    But then Josephus said that nothing remained of Jerusalem but some walls from tower defences. The Temple was in a different place. If you want faith to be based on observation/evidence, you are falling towards the scientific method!

    Here I agree with Taymiyyah and Christ – those are just physical monuments, objects of idolatry. The Kingdom of God is within you, not in some rocks.

    I take AnonStarter’s link as closer to the truth – Islam allows lying to avoid harm to Muslims, broadly in line with the Jewish allowance for lying, just with less casuistry.

    All lies are equal – they turn reality into fantasy, and lead people down blind alleys. The Buddha said don’t lie even to make a joke. I agree.

    • Replies: @A123
    , @Brewer
  25. @A123

    Al Aqsa translated means “the furtherest”. Mohammad went from the closest mosque being Mecca to the furthest. Al Aqsa as a place is never mentioned in the Koran. Supposedly Mohammad saw Jerusalem in a dream as his last stop to heaven. But no one ever saw Mohammad in Jerusalem dead or alive and never on a winged horse. Clearly the 3rd holiest sight in Islam was conveniently placed on the one and only Jewish holy site the Temple mount. Standard Islamic fare. And the Muslims are the first to condemn Judaism for false claims. The Temple mount claim with the ride to heaven by the Prophet is weak even amongst Muslims, as Jerusalem was never important to Islam or Mohammed. Labeling the dome of the rock Al Aqsa was an latter day event.

    • Replies: @A123
  26. A123 says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    You are ducking the question. Let me try again:

    — True or False — Jihadi colonizers had not yet reached the current location of Jerusalem when Muhammad died.

    Do not evade. Answer explicitly.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Ilya G Poimandres
  27. Islam allows lying to avoid harm to Muslims, broadly in line with the Jewish allowance for lying, just with less casuistry.

    The conditions are clearly articulated: the first concerns facing the prospect of death or renunciation of one’s faith; the second concerns reconciliation among two parties embroiled in vain contention; and the third concerns reconciliation between estranged spouses. The first is common sense. The last two are essentially innocuous, evolving from circumstances in which many — Muslim and non-Muslim alike — have found themselves, seeking a means by which to ameliorate conflict whose perpetuation is harmful to the health of an otherwise beneficial relationship. One who is sincere in his effort will often find that it isn’t even necessary to lie in order to patch things up.

    That’s the commonplace understanding and those are the limits set forth. Yes, there are outliers who have developed an argument for deception that is little different from that of many Jews, advancing the falsehood that the contemporary world is either situated in the Abode of Islam or the Abode of War — a concept that had its place many moons ago. But they’re not normative at all.

    In fact, most of our literature approaches lying as follows:

    The Prophet sallALLAHU ‘alaihi wa sallam was asked, “Can a man of faith be a coward?”

    The Prophet replied, “Yes.”

    He was then asked, “Can he be a miser?”

    He answered, “Yes.”

    And finally, he was asked, “Can he be a liar?”

    The Prophet said, “No.”

    Al-Muwatta, Volume 56, Hadith 19

    Thank you for the opportunity to explain this. It’s been some time.

    • Thanks: MrVoid
  28. A123 says:
    @Fran Taubman

    no one ever saw Mohammad in Jerusalem dead or alive and never on a winged horse.

    You are correct.

    Given the flexibility of the often translated New Testament, a winged Nazgûl event would have been captured as a warning to those who follow God as a warning about the horrors of Allah. Revelations would have a 5 horsemen representing evil — War, Famine, Muhammad, Pestilence, and Death.

    Clearly the 3rd holiest sight in Islam was conveniently placed on the one and only Jewish holy site the Temple mount.

    The followers of Satan/Allah also desecrated nearby Christian construction dating back to the Holy Roman Empire. Violent Islam is intolerant to all Infidels.

    PEACE 😇

  29. Brewer says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    “The description is of a glorious kingdom, a huge empire, authors in the king’s court, a huge army, military conquests—and then someone like me comes along and says, ‘Wait a minute. They were nothing but hillbillies who sat in Jerusalem in a small territory, and the rest of it is either theology or ideology”

    – Israel Finklestein, Israel’s foremost archaeologist.

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  30. @Brewer

    says, ‘Wait a minute. They were nothing but hillbillies who sat in Jerusalem in a small territory, and the rest of it is either theology or ideology”

    Kind of similar to the Mohammed winged horse story to heaven. And the 4 people that saw Jesus rise from the dead.
    There was a physical temple on the mount. And the dome of the rock is built around the foundation stone of the temple which was chiseled to look like a hoof print.

    I will take my story hands down over the other two. Lol.
    Finkelstein said a lot of other stuff. And there have been recent discoveries of the city of David that prove a more grander kingdom then Finkelstein spoke about.

    • Replies: @Brewer
  31. The Hevron Massacre of August 24, 1929

    After 8 years of calm from 1921 on, many Jews and the British assumed that riots were a thing of the past. They were horribly mistaken.Op-ed

    cartoon after Hebron massacre
    On August 17, 1929, a Jewish boy was stabbed after he retrieved an errant ball in an Arab garden in Jerusalem. A melee ensued, wounding 15 Arabs and 11 Jews. Within the next four days there were 12 attacks on Arabs and seven on Jews in the Jerusalem district alone. Additional assaults were reported within Jerusalem and outside the city. [1]

    The young boy’s funeral became a massive protest against Arab violence and British rule. On Friday August 23, 1929, the Arabs began what the Shaw Commission—the British Commission sent to investigate these disturbances—called a “ferocious attack,” in Jerusalem, ostensibly over Jews worshipping at the Western Wall. To disperse the many “fanatical” Arab crowds—who were wielding clubs, sticks and some even swords—the police “opened fire for the first time,” employed armored cars, and arranged for a number of British aircraft to fly over Jerusalem as a show of force. British naval assistance and troop reinforcements were requested after the police advised they were no longer able to ensure public security. [2]

    In Hevron, angry Arab crowds gathered to vent their anger. The major assault on Hevron began at approximately 9 a.m. on August 24th. Eight American Jews were killed and 15 wounded from the Slobodka Yeshiva. [3]

    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/285842

  32. @A123

    I haven’t personally researched it, and I’ll trust you on that they didn’t! 🙂

    If we had to remove newer relics cause they were built on where people thought there were older relics, how much peace would that bring?

    It’s all materialism to me. The position is better not to value the material but strive for the spiritual. A light unto the nations would let the Muslims have their mosque.

    • Replies: @A123
  33. A123 says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    It’s all materialism to me. The position is better not to value the material but strive for the spiritual. A light unto the nations would let the Muslims have their mosque.

    Where you have gone astray is that the victory mosque is more than merely physical. It is a soul knife that twists every day inflicting damage on the spirit of all who abide it.

    This is not accidentally building on top of something that was abandoned. The purpose of al’Aqsa is to crush hope and goodness out of those who lay eyes upon it. The Essence of Humanity is diminished by the presence of al’Aqsa. It is a Manifestation of Evil, Given Form and Substance.
    ____

    I guess there is room for a solution on your terms. Islam can strive for spirtuality. Muslims can depart their gaudy monument to military victory over Infidels. Jews and Christians do not care why the Muslim Occupiers leave, just that the desecration ends.

    PEACE 😇

  34. Brewer says:
    @Fran Taubman

    I will take my story hands down over the other two.

    Yup!
    Who needs archaeology and documents when one has legends eh?

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  35. @A123

    Al Aqsa is a deliberate attempt to wipe out Judaism and Christianity and replace it with Islam. That is the only reason. Jerusalem has no holy value to Islam. None. Islam’s very existence in the real world depends on the ability to wipe out what went before. That is the whole point of the prophet Mohammed. He was the lates the greatest and the last. The prophets mission was to correct the mistakes of Judaism and Christianity, and bring monetheism to the idolatry of Arabia. Judaism has no such desire and recognizes all nations and religions in their ability connect spiritually with the divine as they see fit. It is open to everyone. All people can aspire and achieve a connection by being a righteous individual. Judaism is infinitely more refined and open to other religious paths, and would never build a temple on the black stone of the Kabba. That is what that mosque represents. It is if Jews were to level the Kabba and build a temple.
    To call Judaism a supremacist religion fails to see the openness and non subjectivity of those who are not Jews. Jews may have a unique path, a path that does not require the mediation of a prophet like Mohammed or Jesus. A more direct one on one path. Both of those two religions, especially Islam is very damning to other faiths. Muslims are the racist supremacist. What do you call building a mosque over another religions temple if not a racist supremacist action?

    It will be really wonderful once this holy war agains the Jews is over, and people like Cook are permanently out of business with the BS.

    • Replies: @Ilya G Poimandres
  36. @Brewer

    Like I said there is new archeology especially on the city of David to reveal it to be bigger and more important then Finkelstiens.
    My point is that if the Jews are legends then the other two are legends. Both religions hold the exodus and Moses to be authentic. Jesus’s last meal was at a Passover seder. So when it comes to land rights in the holy land, the Jews have as much claim as the other two. It is a compare and contrast story, not a one shot to kill the magic of Judaism. What does that prove with regards to Islam and Judaism having equal claim to the land.

    • Replies: @Brewer
  37. @A123

    I see all of those three faiths (not Christ’s message however), as world domineering. That is what faith in Absolutes offers you. Atheists do it, theists do it. U verifiable belief implies deluded action. It’s not just Muslims that built on sites of other religions, Christians are famous for it. Never heard of Jews doing the same thing though.

    Jews and Christians do not care why the Muslim Occupiers leave, just that the desecration ends.

    You demand through force, for an error of force. Hate doesn’t solve hate. Let them have your assumed Temple Mount – Judaism has changed so much in 3000 years, why can’t it let go of the place they sacrificed livestock? It has no correlation to the morality it says it preaches.

    • Replies: @A123
    , @KA
    , @KA
  38. Brewer says:
    @Fran Taubman

    there is new archeology

    Yep, I’ve seen some of it. Its actually old, the death-rattle of the Allbright school.

    Both religions hold the exodus and Moses to be authentic

    Rational observers, reliant on evidence do not.

    Jesus’s last meal was at a Passover seder. So when it comes to land rights in the holy land, the Jews have as much claim as the other two

    Not sure even Jesus could turn enough water into wine to enable me to make sense of this non-sequitur. But then, I have never, in any reality (chemically induced or otherwise) been able to understand the connection between one’s religious beliefs and land tenure. Islam and Judaism do not have claim to the land, equal or unequal. That claim belongs to the people who lived there prior to the Zionist invasion, regardless of which superstition they personally embrace. A people who, according to geneticist Ariella Oppenheim of Hebrew University, are “descendants of a core population that lived in the area since prehistoric times, albeit religiously first Christianized then largely Islamized, and all eventually culturally Arabized”
    I live in a more rational World where even the most recent immigrants can own property and those who would evict them because unidentified ancestors once lived there get locked up in either prison or the insane asylum.

    • Agree: Tommy Thompson
    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  39. @Fran Taubman

    Judaism has no such desire and recognizes all nations and religions in their ability connect spiritually with the divine as they see fit.

    That’s a morality that accepts a child rapist as a child rapist, and a murderer as a murderer.

    After all, Aztecs cut out hearts in live sacrifice, and Islam accepts honour killings!

    So Judaism accepts those?

    It doesn’t.

    It sees them as inferior.

    And rightly so.

    But Judaism has aspects that can easily be called inferior relative to universalist statements like yours.

    The division in action between self and other – someone else can give you Talmudic bullet points, you are faithful, you are aware of many of them anyways.

    That this difference in this action is down to self-worship – Avodah Zarah of the highest order.

    And as a necessary rant, Islam has idolatry too imo – that of Muhammad (salla leeha leihi wa salam).. That thing in the brackets, and his position in the Shahada.

    The problem is that Judaism claims superiority of the faith message, but when asked or debated on its superiority, it throws its toys out the pram and guns down the messenger, every time.

    That’s a sign to anyone that operates within reason, aside from emotion.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  40. Svigor says:
    @A123

    Jevvs: “Palestinians are a made-up people, they don’t exist. Rights can’t accrue to a phony people.”
    Also jevvs: “Whites are a made-up people, they don’t exist. Rights can’t accrue to a phony people.”

    No Palestinian ever called me goy.

  41. Svigor says:
    @Lot

    This from a half-jevv apparently unaware that his group calls itself “persecuted” with nauseating frequency, despite being the world’s richest, most powerful, most privileged, most indulged…

    …and the prime movers behind BDS (silence the Palestinians) and “hate speech” laws (silence the Whites).

    This is why, in all their kvetching about the never-ending “persecution” that jevvs face, none of them ever ask why.

    Because they already know why.

    Jevvs are always full of self-aggrandizing humblebragging about “why” – they’ve always got several bullshit answers. But they never think to ask anyone else. Would interfere with their ethnic masturbation.

  42. A123 says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    I am Christian, so to an extent I see the issue of the Temple Mount as an outsider.

    It’s not just Muslims that built on sites of other religions, Christians are famous for it. Never heard of Jews doing the same thing though.

    It has happened, but it is discouraged. Building a church on top of someone else’s graveyard is problematic. The primary reason it is done is to restore a site that was stolen by others and is being reclaimed.

    I do not claim the past of Christianity is perfect. Only that we have for the most part we have improved over time. For example, the Church one sold indulgences, until the Protestants challenged that practice.

    The current hijacking of churches by liberal non-believers is a serious problem, but should be covered in a different thread.

    You demand through force, for an error of force. Hate doesn’t solve hate.

    Let us consider a hypothetical — A family of grizzly bears turns up and starts living adjacent to you house. You do not hate the bears, however decisions must be made. Would you:

    -1- Do nothing, placing your children at risk?
    -2- Build walls & traps, use force to restrict the bears? How contained must the bears be to not pose a threat? Is this how a bear should live?
    -3- Relocate the bears back from where it came?

    While the bears will no doubt resist being trapped and transported. Option #3 is best for both the children and the bears.

    Moving down the block seem tempting as an option, but bears will have cubs. There will soon be more bears next to your children. And, solving the problem is harder because there are now more bears.
    ____

    Sadly, no matter how good individuals may be, collectively the followers of Allah pose the same sort of threat as the bears. How many people have suffered and died because of because of Allah’s violence?

    Israel has tried Option #2, containing the threat. This has not worked. The result has been bad for Palestinian Jews and even worse for non-Palestinian Muslims. And, as provocations in the name of Allah grow more dangerous, the minimum necessary containment becomes more strict over time.

    Why not try Option #3? Helping Muslims return to their ancestral lands. This creates an opportunity for the life they want and should be able to lead.

    Once parents & children have left the strife of the front-lines they cannot be victimized by violent leaders offering false promises of martyrdom & conquest. They can escape the dole and limitations of life imposed by UNRWA handouts. They can once again believe that their children will have a better life.

    This is an act of kindness, not of hate.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Svigor
    , @Ilya G Poimandres
  43. @Brewer

    Wowser,
    Your rational clarity comes thru with such precision you could knock the most ardent supernatural religious person to their senses. So impressive. But since you wondered onto the rational, lets get a hold of some facts. There were Jews living in Arabia uninterrupted since Temple times. Every Zionist and Jew hater point to the European Ashkenazi Jews as the colonizer to fit their colonial narrative. Nothing could be further from the truth. All of the Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews lost their homes when Israel was partitioned. As many refugees as Palestinians.
    Lets stick to history Mr. Rational. The land was owned by the Ottomans and much of it was bought and registered from Absentee Ottoman Sheiks. No-one wanted to live in the sand lot of Palestinian until the Jews got there. Palestine was a backwater. No matter the land was purchased at hugely inflated prices. So the Jews were there, and most of the Palestinians came from Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon there were very few Palestinians lived there uninterrupted since prehistoric times. Get a life!!. The land was supposed to be divided between Arabs and Jews, proportionally both groups are indigenous. If you want to be rational then speak the truth. Or join the supernatural Muslims with the winged horse to heave story and the hoof print in the temple foundation stone, and step aside. Here is Golda Mier a very rational person discussing Palestine and Palestinians.

    • Replies: @Brewer
  44. anon[713] • Disclaimer says:

    Israel has helpers – Facebook , NY Times ,and US government . We dont hear about past .We are not allowed to hear the present made possible by Israel.

    1 BANGKOK — Facebook is planning legal action against the government of Thailand for ordering the social media platform to partially shut down access to a group critical of the Thai monarchy, the company said on Tuesday https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/25/world/asia/thailand-facebook-monarchy.html 2 . IN SEPTEMBER OF last year, we noted that Facebook representatives were meeting with the Israeli government to determine which Facebook accounts of Palestinians should be deleted on the ground that they constituted “incitement.” The meetings — called for and presided over by one of the most extremist and authoritarian Israeli officials, pro-settlement Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked. Ever since, Facebook has been on a censorship rampage against Palestinian activists who protest the decades-long, illegal Israeli occupation, all directed and determined by Israeli officials. Indeed, Israeli officials have been publicly boasting about how obedient Facebook is when it comes to Israeli censorship orders: New York Times put it in December of last year, “Israeli security agencies monitor Facebook and send the company posts they consider incitement. Facebook has responded by removing most of them. Needless to say, Israelis have virtually free rein to post whatever they want about Palestinians. Calls by Israelis for the killing of Palestinians are commonplace on Facebook, and largely remain undisturbed. https://theintercept.com/2017/12/30/facebook-says-it-is-deleting-accounts-at-the-direction-of-the-u-s-and-israeli-governments/As Al Jazeera reported last year, “Inflammatory speech posted in the Hebrew language … has attracted much less attention from the Israeli authorities and Facebook.” One study found that “122,000 users directly called for violence with words like ‘murder,’ ‘kill,’ or ‘burn.’ Arabs were the No. 1 recipients of hateful comments.”

  45. KA says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    It’s not just Muslims that built on sites of other religions, Christians are famous for it. Never heard of Jews doing the same thing though”

    No Israel build bars, restaurants ,and museums on top of 800 years old graveyard and change the landscape of the historical societies. They displace the people and erase the memories built on sands stones and timbers .

    They even call the museum “Museum of Tolerance” . Even Hitler would have been surprised at lack of his imagination.

  46. KA says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    Israel turning mosques into synagogues, bars

    The study also showed that 40 mosques were either destroyed, closed, or abandoned, while 17 others were turned into bars, restaurants, or museums.

    https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20200728-israel-turning-mosques-into-synagogues-bars/
    ————–
    Bulldozers demolish a mosque in ‘unrecognized’ village of 14,000 near Beersheba-https://mondoweiss.net/2015/05/bulldozers-unrecognized-beersheba/
    —————
    Mamilla cemetery does not exist anymore. What exists now is a hotel, a school, a parking lot, a public garden, a nightclub and the US consulate. Also a museum to celebrate tolerance. But the meaning of tolerance in West Jerusalem, a few steps away from the Old City, is surreal — to build the story of a new Jerusalem, the Israeli authorities are erasing its past.

    In 1948, the year of Nakba, the catastrophe of the Palestinian people, the upper part was immediately transformed into a public park, renamed ‘Independence Park’, aimed at celebrating the victory in the ’48 war. They created the garden, uprooting and removing dozens of ancient tombs.

    but, according to an investigation by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, at least 1,500 tombs were removed by bulldozers and the human remains just thrown away.https://nena-news.it/israels-destruction-of-mamilla-cemetery-part-of-effort-to-remove-palestine-from-jerusalem/
    ———–
    The discovery of a rare aerial photo of Jerusalem in the 1930s, taken by a Zeppelin, has provided the long-sought-after proof that when Israel occupied the Old City in 1967 it secretly destroyed an important mosque that dated from the time of Saladin close to the al-Aqsa Mosque.–https://www.wrmea.org/012-september/the-nakba-continues-proof-found-that-in-1967-israel-destroyed-centuries-old-jerusalem-mosque.html

    —————
    Following the torching by Jewish settlers of a mosque near Ramallah in June, Dan Halutz, a former military chief of staff, admitted there was no political will to find the culprits. “If we wanted, we could catch them, and when we want to, we will,” he told Army Radio.

    Jewish far-right groups responsible for a series of arson attacks on West Bank mosques over the past year broke dangerous ground last week when they turned their attention for the first time to holy places inside Israel. A mosque was torched, followed days later by an attack on Muslim and Christian graves.

    In each case the settlers left their calling card – the words “Price tag”, indicating an act of revenge – scrawled on their handiwork.

    None of the recent attacks against Palestinians has led to prosecutions.

    The desecration last week of a mosque in the Bedouin village of Tuba Zangariya, in northern Israel, should not therefore have been a surprise. It was followed at the weekend by the despoiling of two cemeteries in Jaffa, next to Tel Aviv.

    https://mideastposts.com/middle-east-politics-analysis/mosques-and-graves-attacked-by-israeli-settlers/

    • Thanks: Ilya G Poimandres
  47. Svigor says:
    @A123

    Lol, and like any good Zionist heretic, you side with the rich, powerful jevvish Mammon/Goliath over the poor, dispossessed Arab Christ/David.

    Do you have any velvet paintings of Jesus dressed up like Rambo mowing down Palestinian women and children with an LMG, or anything kewl like that in your living room? Assuming it isn’t adorned with something more like ADL and AIPAC posters, if you know what I mean (((wink))).

  48. Brewer says:
    @Fran Taubman

    All of the Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews lost their homes when Israel was partitioned. As many refugees as Palestinians.

    Sorry, not even the Ottoman Jews go along with hitching a ride on the magic carpet. Jews were not ethnically cleansed from Arab States. They became insecure when Israel massacred and expelled Palestinians creating antipathy towards them in Arab lands. At the same time, Israel had great need of immigrants and therefore inflamed the situation:

    “An intensive campaign to secure official political and legal recognition of Jews from Arab lands as refugees has been going on for the past three years. This campaign has tried to create an analogy between Palestinian refugees and Mizrahi Jews, whose origins are in Middle Eastern countries…..
    ….The idea of drawing this analogy constitutes a mistaken reading of history, imprudent politics, and moral injustice……

    The WOJAC figure who came up with the idea of “Jewish refugees” was Yaakov Meron, head of the Justice Ministry’s Arab legal affairs department. Meron propounded the most radical thesis ever devised concerning the history of Jews in Arab lands. He claimed Jews were expelled from Arab countries under policies enacted in concert with Palestinian leaders – and he termed these policies “ethnic cleansing.” Vehemently opposing the dramatic Zionist narrative, Meron claimed that Zionism had relied on romantic, borrowed phrases (“Magic Carpet,” “Operation Ezra and Nehemiah”) in the description of Mizrahi immigration waves to conceal the “fact” that Jewish migration was the result of “Arab expulsion policy.” In a bid to complete the analogy drawn between Palestinians and Mizrahi Jews, WOJAC publicists claimed that the Mizrahi immigrants lived in refugee camps in Israel during the 1950s (i.e., ma’abarot or transit camps), just like the Palestinian refugees.

    The organization’s claims infuriated many Mizrahi Israelis who defined themselves as Zionists. As early as 1975, at the time of WOJAC’s formation, Knesset speaker Yisrael Yeshayahu declared: “We are not refugees. [Some of us] came to this country before the state was born. We had messianic aspirations.”
    Shlomo Hillel, a government minister and an active Zionist in Iraq, adamantly opposed the analogy: “I don’t regard the departure of Jews from Arab lands as that of refugees. They came here because they wanted to, as Zionists.”
    In a Knesset hearing, Ran Cohen stated emphatically: “I have this to say: I am not a refugee.” He added: “I came at the behest of Zionism, due to the pull that this land exerts, and due to the idea of redemption. Nobody is going to define me as a refugee.”

    The opposition was so vociferous that Ora Schweitzer, chair of WOJAC’s political department, asked the organization’s secretariat to end its campaign. She reported that members of Strasburg’s Jewish community were so offended that they threatened to boycott organization meetings should the topic of “Sephardi Jews as refugees” ever come up again. Such remonstration precisely predicted the failure of the current organization, Justice for Jews from Arab Countries to inspire enthusiasm for its efforts.”
    – Israeli Historian Yehouda Shenhav, Haaretz 15.08.03

    and

    “I write this article for the same reason I wrote my book: to tell the American people, and especially American Jews, that Jews from Islamic lands did not emigrate willingly to Israel; that, to force them to leave, Jews killed Jews; and that, to buy time to confiscate ever more Arab lands, Jews on numerous occasions rejected genuine peace initiatives from their Arab neighbors.
    I write about what the first prime minister of Israel called “cruel Zionism.”

    I write about it because I was part of it.”

    Naem Giladi, former Iraqi Jew in the Zionist underground.

    Now.

    Lets stick to history Mr. Rational. The land was owned by the Ottomans and much of it was bought and registered from Absentee Ottoman Sheiks.

    The land was never “owned by the Ottomans”. The land was owned by the people who were Ottoman subjects. Between the 5th and the 12th centuries those people were majority Christian. From then on, Islam became the majority religion. By the time the ethnic cleansing had begun in late 1947, Jewish interests had bought, not “much of it” but just 6% – concentrating on the fertile plains as Arthur Ruppin makes clear. Even Ah’ad Haam reckoned there was no useful land that was not under cultivation by the natives back in the late 1800s.
    Palestine was not a backwater, it was more densely populated than the U.S. at the time. The Survey of Palestine done by the Brits in 1946 and contemporary photographs show a thriving, sophisticated society.
    https://www.palestinephotoproject.org/Gallery-Folder
    No-one who views that interview with the shifty Meyerson creature and who is aware (as was she) that between 250,000 and 440,000 Palestinian villagers (mainly women and children) had been driven from their homes before May 15 1948 could experience anything but revulsion at the deliberate, disgusting travesty she indulges in.
    Time has long passed for these silly tropes. Too many facts out there for such blatant dishonesty. Better to adopt the Benny Morris stance which goes something like “Sure we raped pillaged murdered and ethnically cleansed. If we didn’t there wouldn’t be a Jewish State” – which is at least an honest appraisal.

  49. @A123

    I don’t see that. Islam has practiced conquest like Christianity and Judaism. Singling it out is unreasonable. May as well call yourselves bears too and say we will fight it out like animals.

    Christ’s message was to raise your behaviour, not lower it.

    Muslims don’t all come from Arabia. Hindu Muslims like India, Indonesian Muslims like Indonesia, Chinese Muslims like China.

    Israel? It was a colonial enterprise and appeared in contravention of the UN Charter. It will still get its right to exist through having been there for long enough (East Timor was considered historically cristalized as different after 300 years of separation under different colonial powers), and I don’t see why this right doesn’t appear once everyone who lived in the previous status quo has died – so 100 years or so. But it won’t find peace until it chooses peace, not whataboutery about how someone has hurt them.

    I have my errors, but I never feel a victim. Someone hurts me, they have hurt themselves even more so, I just move on.

    Palestinians should be like this too, but the difference is Israel is still hurting them, and they can’t move anywhere.

    • Replies: @A123
  50. @Brewer

    Sorry, not even the Ottoman Jews go along with hitching a ride on the magic carpet. Jews were not ethnically cleansed from Arab States. They became insecure when Israel massacred and expelled Palestinians creating antipathy towards them in Arab lands. At the same time, Israel had great need of immigrants and therefore inflamedThe situation

    Total lie. I guess you don’t hang out with any 2 nd and third generation Libyans, Iraqi, or Syrian Jews or were kicked out with nothing but the shirts on their backs.

    You know nothing. You rely on Jew hating or Zionist hating propaganda. Go to Great Neck or Brooklyn and meet Mizrahi Jews who lost everything.
    Read my friend Lucette Lagnado’s book. The man in the Shark skin suit. Whose family lived in Egypt and Syria for generations and were kicked out of Egypt by Naser. Taken in by a Jewish agency in Paris and finally I migrated to the US her father once a successful business man who did business dressed in a shark skin suit in the Cairo Hilton ended up selling ties in a Manhattan subway.

    • Replies: @Svigor
    , @Brewer
  51. @Brewer

    Time has long passed for these silly tropes

    To Mr. Silly (Brewer)
    Sans tropes read this review.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/10/books/10book.html?referringSource=articleShare

    How used up are your tropes?

  52. Clyde says:
    @A123

    Jihadist Islam has been the world’s most successful imperialism ever since Muhammad started his war lord days in Mecca, 14 centuries ago. So the Jews took back a small sliver of this Islamic conquest. Good for them. Islamic territory should be diminished much more. Instead Europe is getting conquered via the Muslim hegira called Muslim immigration, and fast Muslim reproduction rates.

    You nutty righties/lefties united in Jew hatred. You can keep talking about all your lovely Paleostinians that Israel expelled during and after the 1948 war. You never mention that an equal number of Jews were expelled from Muslim Arab nation for revenge. There were roughly 800,000 on both sides of this equation. This was a population transfer/exchange, same as the Indo-Paki one. Same as went on after WW2 in Europe as many Germans fled back to Germany from the nations east of them..

    The scales of justice were balanced from 1948 onward for about 10 more years as Jews got kicked out of Muslim-Arab nations or sought freedom in Israel over dhimmihood in shthole Mulsim nations. 300,000 Jews came to Israel from Iraq alone.
    ___________________

    All Muslims are commanded to emulate Muhammad’s Hegira by invading Europe via an immigration-Hegira.

    Hegira – Wikipedia
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijra_(Islam)
    The Hegira (medieval Latin transliteration, also Arabic: هِجْرَة‎, Hijra or Hijrah, meaning “departure” or “migration”) is the journey of the Islamic prophet Muhammad and his followers from Mecca to Yathrib, later renamed by him Medina, in the year 622.

  53. A123 says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    Palestinians should be like this too, but the difference is Israel is still hurting them, and they can’t move anywhere.

    You have this 100% backwards.

    — How many Jewish nations are there in the world? ONE
    — How many Muslim nations are there in the world? At least 50, maybe more.

    Non-Palestinian Muslims are hurting Palestinian Jews. Those Jews are in the only Jewish nation and have no where else to go.

    Why are NONE of the 50 Muslim nations willing to accept Muslims returning to their ancestral homeland?
    _____

    Blaming the Jewish victims of Muslim violence is unconscionable. Your spirit is in very bad shape of you insist on kicking Jews that have no where else to go. Their only option is defending their children against unprovoked aggression. And, they will do whatever is necessary to survive.

    Why are 1.8 Billion Muslims so closed minded that they cannot help their kin return home? If Charity is actually a Pillar of Islam, it should achievable. Why do you refuse to consider asking them to help? That would be much more productive than blaming the victims.

    PEACE 😇

  54. @Ilya G Poimandres

    Islam accepts honour killings!

    No.

    Islam has idolatry too imo – that of Muhammad (salla leeha leihi wa salam).. That thing in the brackets, and his position in the Shahada.

    “SallALLAHU ‘alaihi wa sallam” translates as “May the peace and blessings of God be upon him.” If either this statement or reference to the Prophet in the shahada equates to idolatry, then there’s no manner of consciousness which doesn’t, since nobody pursues a path ex nihilo.

    Actions are judged according to their intention, which is not divined exclusively by examining the appearance of the act and summarily processing it through our imagination, particularly where prayer is concerned.

  55. @A123

    Most not all Muslims living in Palestine prior to 1948 were recent immigrants from all over Arabia. It is easy to source by the last name of a person. It will indicate the tribal affiliation and location. The house of Saud originated from Iraq. Migration to Palestine came from Iraq, Syria (Palestine was considered lower Syria and never had a unique tribe or language called Palestinians, all that pre historic Cannon origination is BS), and Lebanon.

    It was criminal to put those Palestinian refugees in camps making them live in squalor until Israel was defeated by Jihad. Look at Lebanon those people should be granted citizenship, instead they live in ridiculous refugee camps after 3 generations, with no way to secure a job. You reap what you sow.

    It was always a fake identity and a fake cause. Time to move on. Jordan should become the Palestinian state. It was a part of the original mandate and was never an independent country. Jordan is the most colonial fake country over there. Most Jordanians are Palestinians.
    It did not work out for the Palestinians because there nationality claims were always lies. You are correct that little sliver like pencil line on a map with all of Arabia surrounding it is the one and only Jewish state.

    9de04b8899fd764ef70411b7b1ec912f

    • Replies: @A123
  56. A123 says:
    @Fran Taubman

    It was always a fake identity and a fake cause. Time to move on. Jordan should become the Palestinian state. It was a part of the original mandate and was never an independent country. Jordan is the most colonial fake country over there. Most Jordanians are Palestinians.

    That is certainly what should have happened 60 years ago.

    The division of The Palestinian Mandate into Muslim Palestine and Jewish Palestine should have been an easy win for all sides.
    _____

    Trying to make such a change now is much tricker. UNRWA, Fatah, and al’Hamas all keep personal power by inciting hate & violence. How does one keep New Muslim Palestine from being run into the ground by these parasites? These Muslim leaders will continue to expend Muslim Children as human shields.

    The better solution for a clean start is to establish New Muslim Palestine with:
    — No land border with Israel.
    — Initial governance as a Protectorate

    One option is the “Southern Sinai” solution. Muslim civilians will have an orderly relocation to New Muslim Palestine that aligns with available infrastructure. As a Protectorate of Egypt, police and other services would be run by a Governor appointed by Cairo. Anyone with political ties to the corrupt UNRWA, PLO, Fatah, Iranian al’Hamas, or Palestinian Iranian Jihad [PIJ] will not be allowed into the Protectorate of New Muslim Palestine.

    A side bonus with the “Southern Sinai” Solution is that Muslim fishermen will still be able to fish. Trying to fish from Jordan comes with severe geographic limitations.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  57. @A123

    Some sort of federation between Israel, Jordan and Egypt. Hamas must be destroyed, as well as Hezbollah. If it improves the lives of normal Palestinian people I think it is possible. The Jihadist are keeping their entire population hostage to the notion that they will defeat Israel, which is one of those Islamic fantasies like the night ride of Mohammed. That is the trick to permanently retire the Jihadist, and most of the region would like to do that. The Jihadist are hated round the region.

  58. @A123

    Islam was a proselytising religion, there is no return. Same as for Christians – most don’t belong in Nazarreth.

    There is Muslim violence, and there is Jewish violence – the body count is 10:1 for Palestinian dead : Israeli dead in the last few decades.

    I have Asperger’s, the numbers speak openly enough.

    And the Israeli nation is rich enough to pitch a tent anywhere, even if they had to displace the previous landowners with contractual consideration. This didn’t happen in Palestine, and it is not justifiable.

    Israel should have had all of Palestine? Then why the Golan Heights, or an attempt to possess Sinai, or incursions into Lebanon? Because Deuteronomy 20 and Sanhedrin 2 – Judaism allows for aggressive war.

    And the Jewish nation is not geographic. Israel are the people of Israel, have been for millennia, in no way related to what part of the Earth they were found on – this is a great positive about their faith. Less materialism.

    • Replies: @A123
    , @Svigor
  59. Svigor says:
    @Fran Taubman

    Total lie. I guess you don’t hang out with any 2 nd and third generation Libyans, Iraqi, or Syrian Jews or were kicked out with nothing but the shirts on their backs.

    And when and why were they expelled? Lemme guess, it was some time shortly after the jevvs dispossessed the Palestinians?

    You rely on Jew hating or Zionist hating propaganda.

    Jevv-hating and zionist-hating propaganda is far superior to jevv propaganda. It’s simple math: everyone who relies on jevv-hating or zionist-hating propaganda had already heard jevv propaganda 24/7/365 his entire life before hearing a word of jevv-hating or zionist-hating propaganda. And despite this total imbalance in firepower, the jevv-hating or zionist-hating propaganda utterly annihilated the jevv propaganda without much effort, because jevv-hating and zionist-hating propaganda is based in truth and beauty, while jevv propaganda is just some jevv’s silly lies.

    If jevvs want to change this state of affairs they’re going to need to change their behavior:

    1. SHUT YOUR BIG FUCKING MOUTH UNTIL YOU’VE FINISHED THESE STEPS. THE WORLD HAS HEARD ENOUGH OF YOUR BIG GODDAMNED MOUTHS, JEVVS.

    2. Take a long, deep, exhaustive personal inventory, on an ethnic level. You’ll never do this, you’re incapable, but at least someone told you, so you can’t plead ignorance.

    3. Change your behavior so people don’t (righteously) hate you anymore.

    Simple, really, but beyond jevvs, because jevvs WANT to be hated and DON’T want to be loved. To the jevvs, love = assimilation (death) and hate = separation (survival).

  60. A123 says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    There is Muslim violence, and there is Jewish violence

    And they are very different.

    Those who follow Allah intentionally kill children. Do you remember the Sbarro boming?

    Those who follow God attempt to limit casualties:

    — How many of those Muslim dead were combatants?
    — How many were human shields expended by the leaders of Allah’s forces?

    — If a Muslim tried to kill your child, would you allow him to do so out of Enlightenment?
    — Why would you expect Palestinian Jews to voluntarily disarm in the face of a genocidal foe?

    How can you have no compassion for parents with murdered children and claim you are on the path to enlightenment?
    _____

    The TRUTH of the situation is obvious.

    Jewish Parents Love their Children

    They will do whatever is necessary to protect their children.

    As long as non-Palestinian Muslims are violent towards children, Jewish parents are 100% justified in defending their children.

    … if they had to displace the previous landowners with contractual consideration. This didn’t happen in Palestine

    This can still happen. Non-Palestinian Muslims can choose peace. Compensation can and will be made available for those who choose to leave Jewish Palestine and return home.

    Iranian al’Hamas damaged the aquifer under Gaza by diverting pipe and concrete from water works to their efforts to kill Jewish babies. In a decade or two, 1.0-1.5 MM non-Palestinian Muslims will have to leave Jewish Palestine due to lack of fresh water. Maybe that will be enough to make peaceful relocation acceptable to the followers of Allah.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Ilya G Poimandres
    , @Brewer
  61. Svigor says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    Wait, what? Judaism is the most materialistic religion I know of. Which isn’t a criticism, IMO. I’m a materialist, too. That living for the afterlife shit is for the birds. You’re right that jevvs aren’t big on tying themselves to the soil, though; a very nomadic people, historically speaking.

    • Replies: @Ilya G Poimandres
  62. @A123

    Compensation can and will be made available for those who choose to leave Jewish Palestine and return home.

    I will agree with you here, but the number should be in the trillions, unlike the Kushner plan (in physical assets, not $$s).

    Other cultures have payments to alleviate punishments for crimes – the Japanese legal system allows a murderer to pay the victim money to get a reduced sentence.. it’s not really ‘an eye for an eye’ as that is a monetary thing, but nonetheless, so long as the parties are content!

    Those who follow Allah intentionally kill children

    You can find this amongst most faiths/ideologies. We could debate relative frequency of course! 🙂

    In a decade or two, 1.0-1.5 MM non-Palestinian Muslims will have to leave Jewish Palestine due to lack of fresh water.

    Israel has consistently screwed the Palestinians – beyond agreed terms, on water rights. Don’t agree with Hamas actions, but then again if humans are losing, often they spite their enemies even at their own expense.

    • Replies: @A123
  63. @Svigor

    Afterlife shmarfterlife – hell and heaven are here. To quote Milton’s Paradise Lost:

    The mind is its own place and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.

    Judaism is materialist, in the sense that it accepts, at an extreme even for theism, a Self. An ‘I’, or a ‘mine’.

    The afterlife is no different thing. I ask this line of thought (and everyone hates on it): Is a human being impermanent? Is death permanent? How can an impermanent thing, have a permanent property?!

    .. that’s where I’m gonna stop here, long movie night and booze, so don’t wanna start on an infinite rant on faith. However, I respect the Jewish desire to tie themselves to the land with the arrival of geographic Israel. I just wish they didn’t kick out the Arabic help, and developed in a cooperative way with the rest of the world. Smart people – not wise people, imo.

    • Replies: @Svigor
  64. How Israel Wages War on Palestinian History

    Were it as simple as applying the strategy of our resident hasbaraites, we’d have little to worry about.

    But more to the point, it’s a fine article, Mr. Cook.

    I’ve been reading Uri Ben-Eliezer’s War over Peace: One Hundred Years of Israel’s Militaristic Nationalism, published just last year. In the opening chapter, Ben-Eliezer writes

    The argument that emerges in this book is that the past century has been dominated by a Zionist, and later on an Israeli, perception with a relatively fixed and uniform character concerning the conflict. This perception, which I term an ideology, is only marginally influenced by its Arab or Palestinian surroundings and did not include any consideration for their needs or wishes. … I then proceed to argue that this perception, and the way it was translated into practicalities, is one of the causes that prevent peace and lead to war. …

    As will become clear, I do not conclude, on the basis of my research findings, that the Zionists came to Palestine with the goal of living alongside the Arabs. They came to inherit what they saw as their homeland. Their awareness that they would have to fight the Arabs in order to achieve this was apparent at an earlier stage than many observers tend to suggest.

    It’s been an engaging read thus far, though I’ve found at least one point of disagreement concerning Herzl’s alleged altruism, a myth that has been laid to rest by others upon close examination of the controversy surrounding the posthumous publication of his diaries. This point aside, the most compelling aspects include specific historical detail confirming the fact that zionist aggression toward the indigenous Arabs of Palestine was premeditated from the onset, carried out in full consciousness of the end-goal of expulsion.

    In any event, I recommend procuring a copy through your local library or interlibrary loan, if possible. It’s worth it for the many gems of information that stand out in such stark contrast against the shards of broken hasbara scattered so liberally across threads such as these.

    I’d be happy to provide some excerpts about the pre-state Hashomer militia and other details upon request. Thanks.

  65. Brewer says:
    @Fran Taubman

    So its a “total lie”.
    Even though you have several members of the Knesset iterating it.
    Even though you have a former member of the Jewish underground in Iraq saying it. Even though Avi Schlaim, Iraqi-born eminent Historian says “nobody expelled us from Iraq, nobody told us that we were unwanted.”
    Even though members of Strasburg’s Jewish community were so offended that they threatened to boycott WOJAC meetings if the topic of “Sephardi Jews as refugees” ever came up again.
    Even though, your primary example supporting your thesis is a Jewish man in a sharkskin suit who (though never physically threatened) left Egypt where, according to reviews and synopses, he had had a wonderful life (perhaps this book might be a useful counter to those who insist that Jews always had it rough in Islamic lands).
    Now I haven’t read this book but let me see if I can guess a few details.
    I would bet that he left after 1956. That was the year Israel launched an unprovoked attack on Egypt in collusion with Britain and France with the express object of removing Egypt’s leader.
    Need I go into some of the experiences of Japanese and German Americans during WWII or do you understand that when one country attacks another, their kinsfolk in that country have a hard time?
    I hope not but I think it is very clear that your example supports what I wrote.

    Jews were not ethnically cleansed from Arab States. They became insecure when Israel massacred and expelled Palestinians

    I think we can take it as read that Egyptian Jews also “became insecure when Israel”…..attacked Egypt.
    Sad but perfectly understandable without recourse to “Jew hating” or any other superfluous sentiment which, incidentally, is totally absent from my makeup. My beef is with Zionists and, for that matter, any creed that espouses the idea that a right exists for members of a belief system to dispossess the owners of property that might once have belonged to their fellow believers.
    I would ask you to reconsider the man in the sharkskin suit. He had a good life. No doubt he possessed property. That property once belonged to ancestors of Egyptians.
    Even if Egyptians had confiscated it and turned him out, would they not have been doing exactly what Zionists claim as a right?

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  66. Brewer says:
    @A123

    134 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians and 2,172 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis since September 29, 2000.

    • Replies: @A123
    , @Fran Taubman
  67. A123 says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    I will agree with you here, but the number should be in the trillions, unlike the Kushner plan (in physical assets, not $$s).

    New Muslim Palestine will need start-up infrastructure, so much of the compensation would centered on that development. Direct compensation to individuals could be material needed to start a business, build a home, etc. Amounts are negotiable.

    What Muslim parents want most is to get their children away from Jihadi violence & recruiters that draw the necessary Israeli response of counterstrike & restrictions. The biggest compensation is the ability to live free.

    The 1.8 Billion Muslims of the world also gain through this peace, so the total amount to be contributed involves them. No doubt there will be offers to build huge mosques and send religious teachers to indoctrinate in the tradition of the sponsor nation. The appointed Governor of New Muslim Palestine will have to say NO to this type of potentially destabilizing intrusion. Muslim nations will have to contribute to unglamorous core infrastructure, just like everybody else.

    Israel has consistently screwed the Palestinians – beyond agreed terms, on water rights.

    Non-Palestinian Muslim leaders immediately shredded the terms of agreements to screw Palestinian Jews. As the non-Palestinian Muslims functionally terminated those agreements, they do not have a great deal of credibility trying to demand “agreed terms”. I do not agree with everything Israel does, however I understand how being victims of unfair, unprovoked Muslim violence drives them to those actions.

    Destruction of their own water supply to attack their neighbors, points out the significant gain from avoiding a land border between New Muslim Palestine and Israel. Hate structures, such as attack tunnels, require direct proximity. It is much easier to prevent diversion of resources when provocateurs cannot offer immediate violence.

    PEACE 😇

  68. A123 says:
    @Brewer

    There have been a accidents, but most of these casualties were caused by Islam. Jihadi Muslims have killed:
    — How many Muslim children by using them as human shields?
    — How many older Muslim children died after being sent into combat?

    Would you like to know the easiest way to prevent Muslim children from dying? Stop Jihadi Muslims from exploiting & killing Muslim Children.

    When will violent Islam stop putting their own children to death in this obviously hopeless fight?

    PEACE 😇

  69. Ben-Eliezer on early twentieth century Jewish immigrants to Palestine:

    The newcomers faced difficulties finding employment after they arrived in the country. The Jewish farmers, who had immigrated to Palestine around the turn of the century and established agricultural settlements, employed Arab laborers as farmhands and guards. The Zionist laborers resented this, and slogans such as “The conquest of labor” and “Conquer the guard” (from the Arabs) reflected their ethno-national orientation. One of the leaders of Hapoel Hatzair declared, “A nation that hands over its most basic labor of production to others will never be revived. One cannot build a homeland through the labor of others. … An essential condition for Zionist fulfillment is that all the labor vocations in the country must be conquered by Jews” (Shapira, 1967: 13–14). From the outset, socialist Zionists adopted a “zero-sum game” view of reality. As the spiritual leader of Hapoel Hatzair, A.D. Gordon, declared, “Are the Arabs the ‘masters of the land?’ … We will find that the Arabs have only a historical right to the land, just like us—except that our historical right is undoubtedly the greater” (Gordon, 1953: 244–45). [emphasis added]

    What’s interesting is that Hapoel Hatzair (Young Worker) was the more moderate of the two parties that Second Aliyah immigrants had formed. Poalei Zion (Workers of Zion) was the party whose ideology held greater sway over the Hashomer, the “first substantial Jewish military organization formed in the Yishuv (the pre-state Zionist-Jewish community).”

    About Hashomer, Ben-Eliezer writes

    The organization’s immediate goal was to replace Arab guards with Jews, but its underlying objective was far more ambitious. Hashomer promoted the image of the New Jew: strong, healthy of body and mind, and muscular—the diametric opposite of the weak, dependent Jew of exile. Moreover, its members were the first Zionists to develop the theory of conquering the land by force. The organization’s founding meeting discussed the need to liberate the people and the homeland and to establish a Jewish state. The meeting was held under the slogan “In blood and fire Judah fell, in blood and fire Judah will rise.” The poem from which these words were taken also includes the words: “We have arisen and returned invigorated youths … [t]o redeem our oppressed land! We demand our heritage with a mighty hand!”[5] [emphasis added]

    … and …

    During a visit to Palestine in 1911, the writer and literary critic David Frishman had no doubts about the character of Hashomer: “Rather than guarding themselves, they provoke others. Their main concern is that others should know that the people that lives here is tough and rash, so that they will always be afraid.” He warned that the day was coming when their Arab neighbors “will finally awake and unite, and suddenly recognize that they have strength and might; and then they will take their revenge.” [emphasis added]

    Quoting Ben-Eliezer once more:

    … [T]he story of Hashomer illustrates the emergence of a new approach whose adherents did not seek to live in Palestine alongside the Arabs but to dominate them through armed might. In this sense, Hashomer represented an early manifestation of Israeli militaristic nationalism. [emphasis added]

    The importance of this information cannot be understated, particularly when the more commonly advanced narrative is one that portrays indigenous Palestinians as inherently hostile to the presence of Jews in their homeland. By fleshing out these details, Ben-Eliezer provides an invaluable view of the ab initio belligerence with which the early zionist community confronted the native Arab population.

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  70. @Brewer

    I think we can take it as read that Egyptian Jews also “became insecure when Israel”…..attacked Egypt.
    Sad but perfectly understandable without recourse to “Jew hating” or any other superfluous sentiment which, incidentally, is totally absent from my makeup. My beef is with Zionists and, for that matter, any creed that espouses the idea that a right exists for members of a belief system to dispossess the owners of property that might once have belonged to their fellow believers.
    I would ask you to reconsider the man in the sharkskin suit. He had a good life. No doubt he possessed property. That property once belonged to ancestors of Egyptians.
    Even if Egyptians had confiscated it and turned him out, would they not have been doing exactly what Zionists claim as a right?

    Nasser did expel the Jews. You can read your propaganda and I can read mine. But I live and work amongst many Jewish refugees from Muslim lands. I go to their Bar Mitzvahs and interact with them. I believe them and their stories. It is like Holocaust deniers. I come from a family of survivors. Am I going to believe the deniers or my families explanation of what happened?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1956–57_exodus_and_expulsions_from_Egypt

    Your opinion is based on what you read not what you experience. I know many Jewish Iranian, Yemeni, and Libyan refugees, they all have stories. They do not lie. No doubt there is much propaganda on both sides, but there is also reality.

    When you say the Leon Lagnado had a good life and lived on land that belonged to Egyptian ancestors you do nothing but show your ignorance. Everyone comes from somewhere that people lived before. When do you want to stop the supposed “property once belonged”. Are we going back to primordial times. Jews lived in Arabia and Egypt continually since biblical times. So Mr. Lagnado ancestors were Egyptian Jews. Lucette’s mother came from a Syrian family that lived in Syria for a thousand years. The Aleppo codex is the first Hebrew bible dating back to the 1st century AD. For you to say that Jews possess other peoples land is just plan stupid. They possess land like all other peoples. And Lucette’s father had a legal right to his land same as other Egyptains. Your claim that because they were Jews, it belonged to someone else is just I do not even know how to describe it. Stupid does not cover that idea. It is more like a blank idea with no bases in facts or reality.

    My beef is with Zionists and, for that matter, any creed that espouses the idea that a right exists for members of a belief system to dispossess the owners of property that might once have belonged to their fellow believers.

    The crux of this statement belies the fact that Jews lived in these lands in smaller numbers then Muslims but still continual for as long or longer then Muslims. Same people different faith. Some converted some did not. You are using religion to separate authentic ownership. It is just a false a made up criteria.

    When Palestine was partitioned like India and Pakistan the larger portion went to the Muslims. That does not negate that Jews had been living there the same as Muslims. Their land was their land. They did not take someone else’s land until the partition plan was rejected and war by the Arabs was declared on the Jewish portion. A war was fought and the Arabs lost. Same as all wars territory lost in an all or nothing battle goes to the winner. If the Jews had lost there would be no Israel or no Jews living independently. Make no mistake the Arab war in 1948 was not about territory it was about eliminating the Jews. Listen to what they said.

    To further emphasize how shallow and stupid your argument about land ownership is. Look at all the land and housing European Jews lost during the WW2. Not just Jews. Parts of Polish land change hands like 3 or 4 times. I know Polish Cristians who could not go back to their villages because they now belong to Russia. Can they reclaim their losses? Who lives in their houses on their land now? Zionism started way before the war when Jews lived for centuries under Christian Aristocracies who determined what legalities the Jews had. Their abilitiy to function and work. Jews were very restricted in their occupations. They could not participate in government. Capricious decisions and Jewish expulsions were made by mobs and the church who blamed Jews for pandemics and other Medieval problems out of ignorance and fear. This inability for Jews to control their own destiny culminated in the Holocaust. The result of years of Catholic Christian hatred towards the Jews.

    After the war the Jews were going to declare their own state in Palestine no matter what. That was their destiny. To fight for their land and ability to control their lives. They won that right. Whatever land dispute you think is fair. Whatever propaganda you read about Palestinian displacement, or Arab loss of land and ownership is a version of the truth that is mute at this point and only a small sliver of what has transpired. It is propaganda, and ultimately does not matter. The Jews won their land and right to self determination much the same as other countries and nationalities have won their land disputes. This is the way of the world. War is ultimately how we decide these disputes. That is what happened to Germany that is what happened to the Ottomans, they lost their land, when they tried to rule over other peoples lands.. The Mufti of Jerusalem was a Hitler protege. What do you think he had in mind for the Jews?

    So your self righteousness about land ownership to the original owners is not only silly it is pointless. So you think the Jews took someone else’s land and it is unfair. Too bad.

    • Replies: @Brewer
  71. @Brewer

    134 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians and 2,172 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis since September 29, 2000.

    Like an hours worth of children’s death in Yemen under starvation and in Syria under whomever.
    Are you horrified by that? Not a Jew in site.

  72. A123 says:

    Why do Muslims Torture Muslim Children?

    For example: (1)

    Palestinian force of the Preventive Security Service (PSS) arrested a 17-year-old boy, from Ethna village in Hebron, without showing a warrant from the Public Prosecution, assaulted him physically, and shackled him subjecting him to degrading treatment. According to his statement:

    “An officer grabbed me from my shirt and took me into the head office and ordered me to carry a heavy metal chair on my head while lifting one of my legs off the ground. When I refused to do so, the officer slapped me in the face and kicked me with his leg. I did what the officer ordered me for 5 minutes. After that, an officer grabbed me from my shirt again and hit me on my head repeatedly until we reached the investigation room. Officers ordered me to strip naked and face the wall and lift one hand and one foot up. I was kicked every time I tried to put my leg down. An inspector drew a fan on the wall and ordered me to turn it on while another inspector drew a ladder and ordered me to climb it. After that, another offer came and ordered me to crawl on the ground naked and officers proceeded to step on my body and head with their shoes on. I learnt later that I was arrested to pressure my father to turn himself in, as I was released after he was arrested.”

    The #1 killer of children in Gaza is Iranian al’Hamas.

    No amount of ludicrous Taqiyya deception can cover up this simple TRUTH. Muslims are oppressed and killed by their fellow Muslims.

    PEACE 😇
    _______

    (1) https://www.pchrgaza.org/en/?p=14961

  73. @AnonStarter

    So while I love this history of Zionism, and search for the truth. I am just curious do you have any historical reviews and documents about Arabia and its rulers and wars? On lets say the takeover of Medina and Mecca by the House of Saud, and the assignations that went along with it? The illegal Hashemite takeover of Jordan? The rise of the Sunni Baath Party of Saddam in Iraq? Are their Arab writers capable and free enough to write about Arabia and it’s dictators and Kings, and the corruption of oil money? The brutality of the minority Sunni populations over Shia majorities? I am shocked there does not exist documentation of the dictators and families. I guess most writers of religious authoritarian regimes would find their fate similar to khashoggi being chopped up into little pieces, or Sadat being gunned down.

    Are Arabian Islamist capable of self reflection? In fairness there is enough blame to go around in the Israeli/ Palestinian saga. I would love to read a historical book about Arafat and his 2 billion dollar fortune was so tucked away that they had to send a posse out to locate his wife in her Paris bunker for the combination to the safe LOL. If Arafat were Jewish there would be 15 books on his corruption and murder legacy. OMG it would make such fantastic copy. Especially the homosexual accusations.

    Any historical or biographical writings on the corruption of the Fatah and Abbas? Do you know how much Abbas’s son is worth? How about Hamas and their money trail?

    You do realize AS that this historical perspective is so one sided as not to be believable. What about the Mufti of Jerusalem and Hitler? Gosh I just do not see many Arabina Islamic writers critical of Islam. Maybe they will get Fatwahs like Rashdi who had to hide fro 3 years.

    Why don’t you worry about your own history instead of searching thru a microscope for every Zionist utterance that might promote your “they really wanted to take over Palestine and destroy the Palestinians” point of view.

    Unless you have quality historical research on the Arab league when they beat their war drums and their desires for the Jews I see no point in any of your research. It is not that it is one sided. It is that there does not exist reliable history on the other side. Like none. But isn’t that they main problem with Arabia and Islam, there does not exist a dissenting view point. You die if you have one. Like Abbas said his fate would be sealed if he made peace with the Jews. Until you figure out your own BS. Leave ours alone.

    My point as always is all people and ideologies are the same. People want their side to survive and win and will at all cost try to achieve this goal including deception. That is the way people are, the way wars our fought the struggle over dominance and territory and the Jews are no better or worse then anyone else. The only thing relevant from this story is the Jews won. Winners write history.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  74. Brewer says:
    @Fran Taubman

    From your link:

    The actions taken to encourage emigration or expel the foreign minorities applied to the whole Mutamassirun population, and after 1956 a large majority of Greeks, Italians, Belgians, French, and British, including Jews, left the country.[10][failed verification] The decree was also relevant to Egyptian Jews suspected as Zionist agents, especially those with free professions and relatives in Israel.[8]

    The expellees were allowed to take only one suitcase and a small sum of cash, and forced to sign declarations “donating” their property to the Egyptian government.[citation needed]

    Foreign observers reported that some members of Jewish families were taken hostage, apparently to ensure that those forced to leave did not speak out against the Egyptian government.[citation needed] Some 23,000—25,000 Jews out of 60,000 in Egypt left,[11] mainly for Israel, Europe, the United States and South America.[citation needed] Many were forced to sign declarations that they were voluntarily emigrating and agreed to the confiscation of their assets. Similar measures were enacted against British and French nationals in retaliation for the invasion. By 1957 the Jewish population of Egypt had fallen to 15,000.[citation needed]

    Know what “citation needed” and “failed verification” means? It means “this has been alleged but we don’t have any evidence”.
    From the footnotes:

    Adams, Michael (1958). Suez and after: year of crisis. Beacon Press. p. 89.: “After various contradictory orders had been given, the Egyptian government only expelled a small minority of the Jewish population of Egypt, though since that time a good many Jews have left Egypt of their own accord.”

    Now let us compare with what you claim is equivalent:

    What the new material shows is that there were far more Israeli acts of massacre than I had previously thought. To my surprise, there were also many cases of rape. In the months of April-May 1948, units of the Haganah [the pre-state defense force that was the precursor of the IDF] were given operational orders that stated explicitly that they were to uproot the villagers, expel them and destroy the villages themselves. – Benny Morris

    I can see only one way you could arrive at that conclusion. Rabbi Ya’acov Perin put it this way: “One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail.” –Rabbi Ya’acov Perin in his eulogy at the funeral of mass murderer Dr. Baruch Goldstein.

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  75. @Fran Taubman

    The title of the article to which I’m responding is “How Israel wages war on Palestinian History,” not “How Arabs followed in the footsteps of Jews.”

    Uri Ben-Eliezer’s latest book is relevant to the topic at hand, as is the work of Ilan Pappe, Simha Flapan, Benny Morris, Rashid Khalidi, Nur Masalha, Norman Finkelstein, and so on and so forth — writers with whose names you’re likely familiar.

    Turning to your tu quoque … In this forum, I’ve written on numerous occasions that the demise of the Arab Muslim world began during the Abbasid reign and has been in terminal collapse ever since. I don’t think you’ll find me defending any of the miscreant conduct that arises from therein, and the American MSM has proven a more than ample megaphone for broadcasting news of it far and wide, which is why there’s really no point in repeating it here.

    You see, Mr. Unz bills this venue as “A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media,” and the single most excluded perspective among these is, beyond a shadow of doubt, that of Israel’s malfeasance, including its corruption on the American homefront (e.g. ongoing war against free speech), which is why I often submit material related to it.

    If it bothers you too much, you’ll probably find better company over at Breitbart or FrontPageMag or any of the other outfits whose ideology coalesces with your own. Or, you’re welcome to continue apace, preaching that all ideologies are essentially identical while undermining yourself by preferring the zionist one over others.

    Up to you.

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  76. @Brewer

    I can see only one way you could arrive at that conclusion. Rabbi Ya’acov Perin put it this way: “One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail.” –Rabbi Ya’acov Perin in his eulogy at the funeral of mass murderer Dr. Baruch Goldstein

    https://www.meforum.org/2769/benny-morris-1948-islamic-holy-war

    Wait so wasn’t this suppose to be a rational conversation with someone who is not bigoted who hateful to Jews? Like you said it is not in your makeup to hate Jews or be bigoted? You pick comments from nut jobs far away from the mainstream to accuse me of agreeing with. You could not find 5 Jews who would view Arabs or Palestinians like that quote. This response to my factual defense of Jewish land ownership? Heavens sounds like a pretty emotional response to my factual points about Jewish land ownership. I have never said anything about the Palestinians having no value.
    With regards to Benny Morris. He has written a new book modifying his earlier claims. Unlike most criticism of Zionism. Morris is a Zionist. Here is an excerpt. Why don’t you stick to the facts and stop the emotional accusations accusing me of something I have never said? Your diatribe was about illegal Jewish ownership of land. Honestly you seem like a closeted Jew hater. Come clean. You hate Jews, you are just couching it with a lot of lipstick.

    Benny Morris: “The 1948 War Was an Islamic Holy War”
    Middle East Quarterly
Summer 2010, pp. 63-69

    Benny Morris is professor of history in the Middle East Studies Department at the Ben Gurion University of the Negev in Be’er Sheva, Israel. For many years, his academic work has provoked controversy on both sides of the political spectrum. One of the group of “New Historians” who sought to re-write the Zionist view of Israel, his notoriety stemmed from an argument, based on a wide reading of sources, that most of the Arabs who left their homes in what had been British Mandatory Palestine did so as a result of the 1948 war and in that sense were “driven out” by the Jews. However, unlike other “New Historians” like Ilan Pappé and Avi Shlaim, Morris was and is a staunch Zionist. Any criticisms of Israel’s behavior he may have had were, he states, permanently changed by the events of 2000, which saw Yasser Arafat turn down a more than generous peace offer by Israel and the start of the second intifada.[1] He has since revisited the controversies of 1948 in two books and many articles, using fresh materials to modify his political views. More broadly, he takes a strong political position with regard to Islam, arguing, with the late Samuel Huntington, that there is a global clash of civilizations that sees Islamic fundamentalism in a state of conflict with the West. The following interview appeared in Yedi’ot Aharonot, May 14, 2010. The excerpts below, without ellipses, focus on issues related to the war of 1948. It was translated from Hebrew by Jonathan Adam Silverman.[2] The introductory remarks to the sections are by Amira Lamm, the interviewer.—The Editors

    • Replies: @Brewer
  77. @AnonStarter

    I have no plot or plan of about what I am going to write about. I just look at posts and react. So I see many of your post are about early Zionism and its less then altruistic desire to have a place for the Jews to live and more about expelling the Arabs, and taking over the land.

    I was not so much disagreeing or needing to defend Zionism. I just thought so many Jews have written negatively about Jews and Zionism. Tons of Jews writing negatively about Jews, and I thought you just do not see that in Islam. Muslims do not write negatively about the Islam and the Palestinian cause. That perhaps the conflict is a religious holy war against Jews not a land battle. I am curious and would like to see the documents behind Arab League’s decision to not accept the 1948 partition and what they wanted to achieve by declaring war on Israel. What was their goal?
    I am wrong to diatribe about why you are posting. You are correct you should post what you feel strongly about and the information that you are posting is interesting and factual, and it means little if I do not like it. I just would love to see archival documents from the Arab position.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
    , @Svigor
  78. Brewer says:
    @Fran Taubman

    Apart from the fact that you obviously missed the irony in my reference to Perin, yours is a reply to an argument we are not having at present.
    Please respond to the points raised in my post before opening up a separate vein.

    Benny Morris has not changed any of the facts he wrote about previously. He simply clarified his attitude to them. In fact I had already alluded to his stance when I wrote this above:

    Better to adopt the Benny Morris stance which goes something like “Sure we raped pillaged murdered and ethnically cleansed. If we didn’t there wouldn’t be a Jewish State” – which is at least an honest appraisal.

    Here is the present argument in a nutshell.
    The man in the sharkskin suit (or any of the other Mutamassirun) were not massacred, raped and did not have their menfolk shot and houses blown up. Those that were suspected of being accomplices to the 1956 attack against Egypt were expelled (citation needed) as would happen in any civilized society after such an attack. From your own link:
    “After various contradictory orders had been given, the Egyptian government only expelled a small minority of the Jewish population of Egypt, though since that time a good many Jews have left Egypt of their own accord.”
    If you still wish to insist that the cases are analogous then I again suggest you must have a value system similar to Perin. That’s all.

  79. @Fran Taubman

    I have no plot or plan of about what I am going to write about. I just look at posts and react.

    One doesn’t need a “plot or plan,” but one should at least think about what she’s going to say before she says it. Plain ol’ common sense.

    Much like understanding why it is that there are more Jews who criticize zionism than there are Muslims who criticize Palestinians: when the former manifests itself such that it begs for condemnation, even many Jews will reject it. Instinctive, reflexive common sense.

    Or like the Arab League’s rejection of the Partition Plan, which, according to the most accurate primary source material, allotted 55.5% of Palestine to Jews — who, until then, owned less than 7% of it — and 45.5% to Arabs — who, until then, owned 85% of it. Simple common sense.

    Or like the fact that the Jewish effort to expel the Palestinian population, which commenced in late November 1947 and resulted in the massacre, rape, and dispossession of Palestinian civilians well before May 15, 1948, necessitated some manner of retaliation on behalf of Arab armies. Common sense.

    And inasmuch as Benny Morris has revised his opinions, these revisions collapse against the weight of such material as Ben-Eliezer presents. The earliest date Morris gives for an Arab proposal of jihad against zionists — advanced by a visiting speaker of the Iraqi Parliament — is 1936, while three decades earlier, zionists of the Hashomer had already made clear their intent to take Palestine by “blood and fire.” The timeline of Morris’s own evidence betrays the fact that such declarations of jihad were motivated by defensive, not offensive motives.

    Which, again, was garden variety common sense.

    • Agree: Brewer
    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  80. Svigor says:
    @Ilya G Poimandres

    The afterlife is no different thing. I ask this line of thought (and everyone hates on it): Is a human being impermanent? Is death permanent? How can an impermanent thing, have a permanent property?!

    This is, at first blush, an issue of semantics. Death is not truly its own thing, but merely what we call the (irreversible) cessation of life. I think it’s safe to say that a human being is impermanent, in the strict sense, because existence as we know it is impermanent, and humans outliving the universe is fairly speculative. That said, humans are, IMO, within striking distance of a far more permanent existence than is communicated by words like immortality or “extreme longevity.” I see no reason that human life can’t be extended to centuries, eons, or even indefinitely (like I said, I’m a materialist).

    Of course, the imprint a person can make on other people can take on far more permanence than people themselves have enjoyed, up to now.

  81. Svigor says:
    @Fran Taubman

    For one thing, jevvs just talk too fucking much, period. It really is a never-ending wall of halitosis. Speaking on behalf of all the goyim, we’ve all heard far more than enough from jevvs to last from here to goddamned eternity. For another, they sure like to talk about how fucking wonderful they are, like you with your humblebragging about how critical jevvs are of jevvs, which is really just such a giant steaming pile of horseshit, obvious to anyone who really pays attention to jevvs. There’s never been a group in history anywhere near as in love with itself throughout history as the jevvs. There’s certainly never been a group anywhere near as eternally impenetrable to criticism as jevvry. I mean we have a whole coterie of jevvs here at unz.com that have nothing to say about jevvs except that they dindunuffin, ever, the end.

    Finally, if you find yourself frequently comparing your group to Muslims sans any sense of irony, you’ve lost the fucking plot.

  82. @AnonStarter

    I have been scratching my head as to how to respond to your post without an exhaustive trek thru the weeds. I am sure you realize that there exist two sides of this story. I will for the sake of time and the desire to move on to other points concede to your post and argument that the Jews intentionally expelled the Arabs from their homes in 1948, and that the partition plan was not accepted because it was grossly unfair. I will even concede that the UN did not have the legally authority to grant the partition plan and grant ownership to the Jews of any part of Palestinian to the Jews.

    The Arabs mustered 4 standing armies against the nascent Jewish state. The departing British were no friends to the Jews, leaving the entire situation in chaos. ripe for the Arabs to claim victory. Why did the Arabs loose their war? Why could they not defeat the Jews? In 1947, 1967, or the Yom Kippur War, etc, The Arabs countries surrounding Israel have not been able to defeat Israel military, even with the Russians behind them. In 1967 when the Russians heavily supplied the Arabs with planes and arms. The entire story as inexplicable, some say a miracle. But here we are, and it is too late to rectify the dispute in a way that would satisfy the Islamist. I would give 2 million dollars to every Palestinian family that wants to immigrate. But who knows.

    Also worth mentioning are 3 facts that can never be reconciled except by war.

    1.There is certainly enough land in Arabia to create a Jewish state that would not have displaced as many Arabs. Population swaps have occurred before with both sides agreeing and a equitable solution found. But the Arabs will never accept Jewish independence. The reality is that religiously Islam cannot concede one square inch of land to Jewish hegemony.Not saying it is right or wrong . So this village or that village is inconsequential to the overall argument.

    2. After WW2 and the Holocaust the Jews were going to create a state in Palestine. The early Zionist ideas that Jews could never live peacefully or control their own destiny in Christian Europe certainly proved to be prescient. The idea that Jews would end up in concentration camps, losing the ability to defend and control their lives. Even the ability to save themselves from a death sentence was proven correct. After the second WW2, all Jews world wide were dedicate to creating a safe heaven, a home for the Jews to rule themselves. It was an imperative.

    3. Why wasn’t Trans -Jordan counted as part of the Palestinian side? Why didn’t the surrounding Arab states take in the Palestinian refugees like Israel did the Mizrahi Jews? Why keep refugees festering in camps all those years like in Lebanon.

    Many conflicts and land disputes mirror this story. An imperative on one side a refusal on the other.
    In other words War. Had the Arabs won there would be no Israel, and probably no Jews. The fact that the Arabs lost is inconceivable. Thru every conflict Israel has come out stronger, and the Palestinians weaker. Now the situation for Palestinians is hopeless militarily and politically. They have lost the initiative by being recalcitrant. Islamist are all or nothing, not one square inch to the Jews.

    I am enclosing the Jewish version of the land dispute. I have heard so many sides of this I will concede that what I am enclosing may be propaganda but the below land division explanation sounds as logical to me as the Arab side. In the Jewish version of the 1948 land ownership debate 70% of the land was the Negev dessert which neither side legally owned but was claimed by the Arab side in their 90 % percentage claim of 1948. They claimed that Bedouins farmed the hilly parts so they owned it. It went something like that.

    https://www.myjli.com/survival/index.php/2017/03/26/land-ownership-in-palestine-1880-1948/

    Land Ownership in 1948
    The claim is often made that in 1948 a Jewish minority owning only 5 per cent of the land of Palestine made itself master of the Arab majority, which owned 95 per cent of the land.
    In May 1948 the State of Israel was established in only part of the area allotted by the original League of Nations Mandate. 8.6 percent of the land was owned by Jews and 3.3 per cent by Israeli Arabs, while 16.9 per cent had been abandoned by Arab owners who imprudently heeded the call from neighbouring countries to “get out of the way” while the invading Arab armies made short shrift of Israel. The rest of the land—over 70 per cent—had been vested in the Mandatory Power, and accordingly reverted to the State of Israel as its legal heir. (Government of Palestine, Survey of Palestine, 1946, British Government Printer, p. 257.)
    The greater part of this 70 per cent consisted of the Negev, some 3,144,250 acres all told, or close to 50 per cent of the 6,580,000 acres in all of Mandatory Palestine. Known as Crown or State Lands, this was mostly uninhabited arid or semi-arid territory, inherited originally by the Mandatory Government from Turkey. In 1948 it passed to the Government of Israel.
    These lands had not been owned by Arab farmers—neither under the British Mandate nor under the preceding regime. Thus it is obvious that the contention that 95 per cent of the land—whether of Mandatory Palestine or of the State of Israel—had belonged to Arabs has absolutely no foundation in fact.
    There is perhaps no better way of concluding and summing up this study than to quote from an article entitled Is Israel a Thorn or a Flower in the Near East? by Abdul Razak Kader, the Algerian political writer, now living in exile in Paris (Jerusalem Post, Aug. 1, 1969):
    “The Nationalists of the states neighbouring on Israel, whether they are in the government or in business, whether Palestinian, Syrian or Lebanese, or town dwellers of tribal origin, all know that at the beginning of the century and during the British Mandate the marshy plains and stone hills were sold to the Zionists by their fathers or uncles for gold, the very gold which is often the origin of their own political or commercial careers. The nomadic or seminomadic peasants who inhabited the frontier regions know full well what the green plains, the afforested hills and the flowering fields of today’s Israel were like before.
    “The Palestinians who are today refugees in the neighbouring countries and who were adults at the time of their flight know all this, and no anti-Zionist propaganda—pan-Arab or pan-Moslem—can make them forget that their present nationalist exploiters are the worthy sons of their feudal exploiters of yesterday and that the thorns of their life are of Arab, not Jewish, origin.”

    It has taken a while for me to write this as I tossed about how to respond. It is hot and I am behind in my work, so I do not know if I will be able to respond anytime soon. I did find this one of the more interesting exchanges that we have had.

    • Replies: @Brewer
  83. Svigor says:

    That said, humans are, IMO, within striking distance of a far more permanent existence than is communicated by words like immortality or “extreme longevity.”

    Meant to say “words other than” there. 🙂

  84. Brewer says:
    @Fran Taubman

    1. There is certainly enough land in Arabia to create a Jewish state
    This could be said of Germany, the U.S. Outer Bratislava or Iceland. What possible principle at Law or morality are you invoking to justify such a dispossession?
    Population swaps have occurred before
    What was it Zionists brought to the table to swap?
    So this village or that village is inconsequential to the overall argument
    Consequential for the inhabitants – just as consequential as the dispossession caused by Nazi Germany’s policies towards European Jews.
    2. Jews could never live peacefully or control their own destiny in Christian Europe
    It was extremely obvious that they were not going to live peacefully in Palestine. In fact there was probably no safer place than post-WWII Europe. History is littered with Jewish politicians including heads of state – about 50 in Britain alone before 1900, including a Prime Minister. To this day many states have a greater number of Jewish politicians than their proportion of the population warrants.
    3. Why wasn’t Trans -Jordan counted as part of the Palestinian side?
    Self-rule for Trans-Jordan had been pledged to the Hashemites since 1915 in return for military assistance against the Ottomans. It was never part of the deal.
    Why didn’t the surrounding Arab states take in the Palestinian refugees
    Primarily because the Palestinians were intent on returning to their homes as any people would and as was their right under Law and remains their right to this day.

    Moshe Aumann’s puff piece is a fraud. It does not even mention the various types of land tenure such as Miri, Matruka, Mewat and Mulk and the one time he refers to Waqf he gets it wrong. It was an outdated system and the land “vested in the Mandatory Power” was a temporary trusteeship created while the British introduced a new land registry to allot the custom owners a modern title. It did not pass to the Government of Israel by any legal means.
    The fraudulent nature of this disinformation piece is made manifest by this:

    abandoned by Arab owners who imprudently heeded the call from neighbouring countries to “get out of the way” while the invading Arab armies made short shrift of Israel.

    For a start, between 250,000 (Arab League estimate) and 440,000 (Rosemarie M. Esber PHD. London/Johns Hopkins) Palestinian villagers had been driven from their homes before any Arab League soldier set foot in Palestine. Furthermore, it is now firmly established from British intelligence archives that the Arab League leaders urged the villagers to stay put. This is confirmed by the Hagganah’s own document “The emigration of Palestinian Arabs in the period 1/12/1947-1/6/1948,” displayed in post 5. above. If Aumann doesn’t know this I’m the King of England.

    • Agree: AnonStarter
    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  85. @Brewer

    This could be said of Germany, the U.S. Outer Bratislava or Iceland. What possible principle at Law or morality are you invoking to justify such a dispossession?
    Population swaps have occurred before
    What was it Zionists brought to the table to swap?

    Clearly your Jew hatred has caused you to loose the plot. Jews lived in Arabia under Muslim rule since the fall of the Temple 70 AD. After the Ottoman breakup, Jews were deserving of independence from Muslim rule, and began settlements under the British Mandate. All legal and all reasonable. A logical conclusion just as other lands were divided and states were made. KSA, Syria, etc. For you to suggest that Jewish independence must result in Arab dispossession shows your virulent racism against Jews, similar to your invoking the validity of Leon Lagnado being expelled from Egypt and your obscure Ottoman Land Code of 1858 to defend Arab land ownership on land they paid no taxes on. You snooze your lose. But to your sense of fairness kick Leon out and give the land to Bedouin squatters. Here from an early post of yours. lol. Practice what you preach.
    Rational people would conclude if you do not pay taxes you lose your land.
    I live in a more rational World where even the most recent immigrants can own property and those who would evict them because unidentified ancestors once lived there get locked up in either prison or the insane asylum.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Land_Code_of_1858

    In 1858 the Ottoman Empire introduced The Ottoman Land Code of 1858, requiring land owners to register ownership. The reasons behind the law were twofold. (1) to increase tax revenue, and (2) to exercise greater state control over the area. Small farmers, however, saw no need to register claims, for several reasons:[3]
    * Land owners were subject to military service in the Ottoman Army
    * General opposition to official regulations from the Ottoman Empire
    * Evasion of taxes and registration fees to the Ottoman Empire

    3. Why wasn’t Trans -Jordan counted as part of the Palestinian side?
    Self-rule for Trans-Jordan had been pledged to the Hashemites since 1915 in return for military assistance against the Ottomans. It was never part of the deal.
    t under Law and remains their right to this day.

    More exposure to your racism. You do realize that the population of Trans-Jordan is the same as Palestine, and that the Hashemites are from Mecca and Medina. So Arab displacement of people is okay as long as it is by other Arabs.? What about the subservience of Palestinians to Hashemites in Jordan. Most are not granted citizenship.

    Why didn’t the surrounding Arab states take in the Palestinian refugees
    Primarily because the Palestinians were intent on returning to their homes as any people would and as was their right

    This one perhaps the most laughable. Just click on and find out what the Arabs planed for the Jews. Arabs were going to drive the Jews into the sea It was a no holds bard call for genocide. If you do not believe me. When Jordan controlled Jerusalem, all synagogues were burnt and a barbed wire fence was but up around the temple mount to keep the Jews out. It was a complete Islamization of Jerusalem free of Jews.

    Never part of the deal? Huh?

    1920-mandate_for_palestine

    This is what I say to all Jew haters. Peace between the Arabs and Israel is ongoing and is being built with the exclusion and around the Palestinian issue. By the end of the year the KSA, Bahrain, and Qatar will have joined the UAE in normalizing relations with Israel. It was brilliant to work around the Palestinians and excel the economic benefits for the entire region. For all you Jew haters, put your Mandatory Palestine maps and Ottoman land rights away and live in the present. Israel conquered Palestine.

    The best post from you on this thread. Totally absent from your makeup? Ya think?

    Sad but perfectly understandable without recourse to “Jew hating” or any other superfluous sentiment which, incidentally, is totally absent from my makeup.

  86. @A123

    Do you think a post like this could be helpful to Israel? Is it not more likely to damage willingness to believe that Israel has a case on its side?

  87. Brewer says:

    I am afraid you are beginning to lose me here Fran.
    I need you to help so we can get back on track as we seem to be moving on to other matters whilst leaving our original topics unresolved. I have posed a number of questions and requests for information that somehow you have interpreted as “Jew Hatred” and have neglected to answer.
    Some would say that this is a typical example of pilpul, a tactic of muddying the waters with extraneous arguments due to an inability to answer those requests. Nevertheless, I will address them in the hope that we can get back to discussing the History and facts of the situation in a rational and civil manner.
    As one who bears no animus to any creed or colour and is proud and glad of the fact that my own family is of mixed race coupled with the fact that “hate” is not an emotion with which I am familiar – I do not even “hate” Zionists just as I do not “hate” those whose political beliefs differ from my own. I may argue vociferously with them and disagree but I regard “hating” them as a childish reaction to such disagreements.
    Nevertheless, I am aware that others may interpret my statements differently so I would like you to quote back to me any statements I have made that lead you to reference “your Jew hatred”.

    Now let me address some of the points you raise.
    Jews were deserving of independence from Muslim rule
    This is difficult for me to understand for my concept of Jewishness is primarily a religious one – the one unifying feature among a polyglot people with vast cultural differences. Zionism was a European phenomenon and when it came down to it, the majority of Arabian Jews chose to emigrate to countries other than Israel. It seems they were not pining for independence as you seem to imply.
    I don’t think Sir Sassoon Eskell, the Prime Minister and father of the Iraqi Parliament would agree – or his brother, the finance minister of Iraq.
    Zionism did not have universal support among Arabian Jews and, if one adheres to the philosophy that any moral principle must apply universally, we must then allow that any religious group are, in your words, deserving of independence. I don’t think this is either practical or desirable.
    But is it really independence Zionists aspired to when planning the takeover of Palestine? The events of 1947-8 and since indicate that it was hegemony which is an altogether different thing.

    Arabs were going to drive the Jews into the sea
    In any conflict there are bellicose statements made. I don’t know who made that particular threat but I doubt it was official. The statement made by the Arab League to the United Nations on May 14 1948 promised no such intention:

    The Governments of the Arab States emphasise, on this occasion, what they have already declared before the London Conference and the United Nations, that the only solution of the Palestine problem is the establishment of a unitary Palestinian State, in accordance with democratic principles, whereby its inhabitants will enjoy complete equality before the law, [and whereby] minorities will be assured of all the guarantees recognised in democratic constitutional countries

    When it comes to “driving into the sea” however, we have the photographic record of the Palestinian residents of Jaffa literally being thrown into the sea in April of 1948 (before the “War” began).

    When Jordan controlled Jerusalem, all synagogues were burnt
    As I understand it, the synagogues were destroyed by mob violence despite the efforts of the Jordanians to protect them. Given that, at that stage, 440,000 Palestinians had been driven from their homes and several massacres had been perpetrated by Zionist forces, the mob violence was probably understandable.

    I am not sure what you hoped to achieve by posting the map of the Mandate. Perhaps you were under the impression that all of the Mandated territory was intended as a Jewish state. Nothing could be further from the truth. The language in every document concerning Jewish entitlement is deliberately precise. Each and every document bears the language of the Balfour Declaration:

    “His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine

    Obviously a Jewish State would prejudice the civil rights of the non-Jewish communities so I think we can assume that was not intended
    Winston Churchill issued a White Paper in which he clarified the matter:

    Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become “as Jewish as England is English.” His Majesty’s Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.’ In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organization, held at Carlsbad in September, 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims “the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development.

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
    , @AnonStarter
  88. @Brewer

    Not sure what you are confused about? I have answered all your question. We are looking at this each thru different lenses. I have explained the Zionist point of view. You refuse to acknowledge my narrative. Your refusal to see the Israeli/ Palestinian conflict as a tale of two stories, with both the Arabs and the Jews behaving in atrocious ways along with the Arab disregard for their own people sacrificing them to defeat Jewish independence together with a fake sincerity leaves me to conclude you hate Jews. It is like talking to a wall. A good example of your just plain refusal to cast any shade on the Arabs.

    Why didn’t the surrounding Arab states take in the Palestinian refugees
    Primarily because the Palestinians were intent on returning to their homes as any people would and as was their right under Law and remains their right to this day.

    So waiting for the refugees to return trumps any humanity to help them live better more productive lives? It has been 70 years. The Palestinian refugees in Lebanon live in camps full of raw sewage. No citizenship no ability to get jobs. They are not returning to Palestine anytime soon.

    Why don’t answer my question about this inhumanity towards the Palestinians? Or the colonization of Trans-Jordan by the Hashemites and the disenfranchisement of the Palestinians still considered refugees.

    • Replies: @Brewer
  89. @Brewer

    Well, I can see that waiting for further development of the conversation proved to be a wise move.

    Let’s see what we’ve witnessed since my last response …

    Fran conceded that

    1. Jews intentionally expelled the Arabs from their homes in 1948,
    2. that the partition plan was not accepted because it was grossly unfair,
    3. that the UN did not have the legal (sic) authority to grant the partition plan, and
    4. that the UN did not grant ownership to the Jews of any part of Palestine.

    Then she undermined all of this by posting a lengthy portion of an article which, she freely concedes, “may be propaganda,” and Mr. Brewer decisively proved that suspicion correct.

    Attempting to wriggle out of her discomfort at this, Fran dished out some gobbledygook about 1858 Ottoman Land Codes and alleged dispossession of small farmers for which she presents no documentary proof, and followed that by serving up a steaming plate of swine tripe — a disinfographic that’s not only mendacious in its captioning, but worthless in terms of delineating the boundaries of Palestine, as elucidated by Kathleen Christison:

    In March 1921, Britain offered Emir Abdullah, the grandfather of King Hussein, the governance of the area east of the Jordan River, which became known as Transjordan – the area across the Jordan from Palestine – and this area was considered thereafter as separate from Palestine. Thus, in July 1922, when the League of Nations formally confirmed Britain’s mandate over Palestine, Transjordan was excluded from the Palestine mandate and from Britain’s promise to assist in the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. In 1946, Britain granted Transjordan independence, and in 1949 the country was renamed the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

    Mr. Brewer, exhibiting a sensitivity that is sure to be wasted on Fran, writes

    Nevertheless, I am aware that others may interpret my statements differently so I would like you to quote back to me any statements I have made that lead you to reference “your Jew hatred”.

    Mr. Brewer, a word, if you please:

    The usual suspects would now like us to imagine that truth-telling is tantamount to anti-Semitism, as per the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA)’s newly innovated parameters for defining the same. As such, entirely factual statements about Jewish acrimony toward the indigenous Arabs of Palestine — an acrimony without which Israel in Palestine would not exist — run afoul of the new guidelines. This wouldn’t mean much but for the fact that Trump’s Executive Order has given these parameters the imprimatur of legal authority, making them a means by which to effectively censor truth in institutions of higher learning.

    And so, you may regard Fran’s accusations as possessing a merit equivalent to those of the IHRA — that is to say, having not a shred of it.

    Otherwise, keep up the good work. You’re doing very well.

    • Thanks: Brewer
    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  90. @AnonStarter

    Attempting to wriggle out of her discomfort at this, Fran dished out some gobbledygook about 1858 Ottoman Land Codes and alleged dispossession of small farmers for which she presents no documentary proof

    My gobbledygook followed this gobbledygook.

    Moshe Aumann’s puff piece is a fraud. It does not even mention the various types of land tenure such as Miri, Matruka, Mewat and Mulk and the one time he refers to Waqf he gets it wrong.

    The very definition of gobbledygook. But thanks for the cheerleading.

    My beef is with Zionists and, for that matter, any creed that espouses the idea that a right exists for members of a belief system to dispossess the owners of property that might once have belonged to their fellow believers.

    and this statement


    Zionism did not have universal support among Arabian Jews and, if one adheres to the philosophy that any moral principle must apply universally, we must then allow that any religious group are, in your words, deserving of independence. I don’t think this is either practical or desirable.
    But is it really independence Zionists aspired to when planning the takeover of Palestine? The events of 1947-8 and since indicate that it was hegemony which is an altogether different thing.

    Statements like this show me that Brewer is not serious about understanding the conflict and more of a Jew hater than an honest observer. You can be anti-Zionist for many reasons. But when you just brush off Zionism and conflate all of Brewer’s idiotic ideas together, it shows a complete lack of historical perspective or understanding of what restrictions and prejudices that Jews faced in Europe from the Middle ages onward from the Christian aristocracy and church, as well as the second class status Jews had in Muslim Arabia. The inability of Jews to live and work where they wanted, and the lack of opportunity to participate in government and control their lives in both Muslim and European communities. The European Holocaust was the final straw for the Jews, as it was not thought that Hitler or the Germans were the ultimate perpetrators, but rather the Holocaust was the culmination of Christian animus towards the Jews for the rejection of Jesus as the Messiah. The focus of Jewish statehood and independence was a moral imperative for European and American Jews. Arabian Jews did not live thru the Holocaust so their position was less urgent.

    The fact that the Arabs resisted Jewish statehood for religious reasons does not diminish the Jewish cause. You can take sides. I can understand the Arab viewpoint, I do not dismiss it. The result is that the Jews won against all odds. They survived and were able to achieve the unachievable. Like all conflicts the gray matter in between is irrelevant except to delegitimize the outcome, which is no longer relevant. Any conflict could be picked apart in the manner that you and Brewer are discussing. As I said I find the delegitimization the Zionist cause, based on challenging facts, which neither side has a lock on spurious and pointless. I could say this you can say that.

    The complete lack of acknowledgement of other religious struggles for independence similar to what the Jews have gone thru is also an indication to me of Brewer’s Jew hatred. Brewer is shocked and so offended by the audacity and what he says the insanity of the Jewish struggle, as well as the inability to see the irrationality of the religious struggle in the context of all religious struggles is just not intellectually honest. The American revolution was about religious freedom. The India /Pakistan and Bangladesh partitions were about religious separation for territorial disputes. The Arab /Israeli should be viewed struggle in context. After years of debating these issues. I find Brewers comments racially prejudice and dishonest as a valid argument.

  91. The very definition of gobbledygook.

    As someone who referenced the Ottoman Land Code of 1858, you should be familiar with the terms. Obviously, you can be bothered only to copy and paste rather than actually read and understand the material you cite.

    The key statements of his you avoid are as follows:

    It was an outdated system and the land “vested in the Mandatory Power” was a temporary trusteeship created while the British introduced a new land registry to allot the custom owners a modern title. It did not pass to the Government of Israel by any legal means.

    Other than replacing “outdated” with “abrogated,” I’d say Mr. Brewer is entirely correct. These facts pull the linchpin out of Aumann’s facade, collapsing it entirely.

    [MORE]

    Citing Mr. Brewer:

    … if one adheres to the philosophy that any moral principle must apply universally, we must then allow that any religious group are, in your words, deserving of independence. I don’t think this is either practical or desirable.

    Well, this all depends on the nature of that independence. Of course, he’s referring to religious polities, so I obviously don’t agree entirely, though I do agree in part. The shari’ah does not allow Muslims to act with unequivocal independence, lacking consideration for the welfare of their subject population. If there’s a corollary in Judaism, its application seems largely absent from the contemporary landscape.

    Back to Fran:

    … it shows a complete lack of historical perspective or understanding of what restrictions and prejudices that Jews faced in Europe from the Middle ages onward from the Christian aristocracy and church, as well as the second class status Jews had in Muslim Arabia.

    No, not really.

    Let’s say for the sake of argument that these were realities (though, in truth, they’re generally exaggerated). The solution is not to create a polity in which the non-Jewish population suffers from draconian restrictions and prejudices. The solution is to offer what is better. Ahad Ha’am spoke of Ottoman Palestine as a land of “unlimited freedom.” I doubt you’ll find the luminaries of Muslim Palestine offering similar accolades about modern Israel for the simple reason that Israel won’t even acknowledge their right to self-determination.

    … it was not thought that Hitler or the Germans were the ultimate perpetrators, but rather the Holocaust was the culmination of Christian animus towards the Jews for the rejection of Jesus as the Messiah.

    Well, there’s typical zionism for you: if the shoe was on the other foot and we said that Jews declared war on Germany as a religious imperative against goyim challenging their influence, you’d be shrieking “Jew-hater! Anti-Semite!” But I suppose such sweeping generalizations are strictly the province of God’s Chosen Few, no?

    The result is that the Jews won against all odds. They survived and were able to achieve the unachievable.

    No, not really.

    Try reading what Avi Shlaim has to say about the military balance in ’48:

    http://users.ox.ac.uk/~ssfc0005/The%20Debate%20About%201948.html

    Then help yourself to Amr Abozeid’s analysis of the balance of forces in ’67:

    https://www.unz.com/article/nasser-and-the-1967-war/#the-balance-of-forces

    You’re welcome.

    The complete lack of acknowledgement of other religious struggles for independence similar to what the Jews have gone thru is also an indication to me of Brewer’s Jew hatred.

    Let’s look at each instance …

    In America, the revolutionaries’ struggle wasn’t religious, it was political. Aside from this, the American-British contention was settled long ago. The partitioning of the Indian Subcontinent wasn’t without a significant sum of objectors, though ultimately, populations subject to the mandate largely acquiesced to it. Also, looking at the current landscape, it’s difficult to discern whether it effectively resolved religious conflict.

    While in Israel, for as much as you want Palestinians and their advocates to shut up, sit down, and accept Israeli hegemony, they simply won’t do that, and with good reason:

    A war only ends when one side decides to concede defeat.

    You’re not mad at Mr. Brewer as a result of some chimeric “anti-Semitism” you conjure up out of thin air, you’re upset because he and I and everyone else who knows the fight isn’t over continues to resist Israel to the extent they can.

    And that fact just sticks in your craw.

  92. Brewer says:
    @Fran Taubman

    “I have answered all your question”
    1. What possible principle at Law or morality are you invoking to justify such a dispossession?
    (This is in response to your assertion that “There is certainly enough land in Arabia to create a Jewish state”. Obviously clearing the land for a Jewish State would necessitate the transfer of current residents.)
    2. What was it Zionists brought to the table to swap?
    (in response to “Population swaps have occurred before”)
    3. I await the substantiation of your assertion that the emigration of Middle East Jews to Israel was equivalent to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. So far your “evidence” (The man in the sharkskin who did not experience any physical intimidation does not make the case).
    You offered a link to support your allegation that Egypt expelled “the Jews” yet one of the few substantive references at that link states “After various contradictory orders had been given, the Egyptian government only expelled a small minority of the Jewish population of Egypt, though since that time a good many Jews have left Egypt of their own accord.” The Lavon Affair in which a group of Egyptian Jews working for Israeli military intelligence planted bombs inside Egyptian, American, and British-owned civilian targets, cinemas, libraries, and American educational centers would seem to be ample justification of any and all expulsions let alone “a small minority”.
    You then re-iterate: “Nasser did expel the Jews.” (implying all) without any substantiation. In my view therefore, I consider that you have not proven even a shred of equivalence.

    I most certainly do acknowledge your narrative – what else is a rebuttal if not an acknowledgement? As a matter of fact, I once embraced your narrative. That was before certain anomalies began to surface. Crucial facts such as that the majority of the Palestinian exodus was caused by violence before the 1948 “War” began. This exposed a major flaw in the Zionist narrative and proved beyond doubt that the official Israeli line was deliberately false. After that, the balance of the “narrative” collapsed like the proverbial house of cards.

    Another shift in my thinking occurred when I realized that there exists a massive error in the narrative, a category mistake.
    Not one of the documents pertinent to the re-organization of the Middle East from the Balfour Declaration through San Remo, Sevres, LON et al contemplates the transfer of property rights or a Jewish State. Not one of the participants possessed any right or power to gift real estate. Yet all Zionists such as yourself seem to be under the impression that a pledge to encourage Jewish participation and immigration in in the nascent state meant being given property rights (except some vague reference to making waste lands available for Jewish purchase). I challenge you to produce any document that does so or even remotely describes how such a transfer might be achieved if you disagree.

    You write of “the Jews” as if there is unanimity, a bloc in solidarity with Zionism. This is simply untrue and has never been so. Large chunks of Jewry were indifferent to or even adamantly opposed to the whole idea. Bundists, the Autonomists, Reform Judaism, the Agude , the Jewish section of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union, Orthodox Judaism – Hasidic rabbis oppose the creation of a Jewish state – to mention a few. I have seen a recent survey that shows a majority of young American Jews favour the restoration of Palestinian rights. Einstein was alarmed at Zionist behaviour as was Erich Fromm:

    It is often said that the Arabs fled, that they left the country voluntarily, and that they therefore bear the responsibility for losing their property and their land. It is true that in history there are some instances — in Rome and in France during the Revolutions when enemies of the state were proscribed and their property confiscated.

    In general international law, the principle holds true that no citizen loses his property or his rights of citizenship; and the citizenship right is de facto a right to which the Arabs in Israel have much more legitimacy than the [European] Jews. Just because the Arabs fled? Since when is that punishable by confiscation of property and by being barred from returning to the land on which a people’s forefathers have lived for generations? Thus, the claim of the Jews to the land of Israel cannot be a realistic political claim. If all nations would suddenly claim territories in which their forefathers had lived two thousand years ago, this world would be a madhouse.

    “Why don’t answer my question about this inhumanity towards the Palestinians?”
    One of the great tenets of both Bible and Law teaches the principle of restoration or restitution . This fundamentally means that that which is taken away from someone by somebody else should be repaid or restored, returned or given back. That is the Palestinian right and attempts to offload that responsibility to others is despicable. The “inhumanity” was the invasion of households, the well documented killings, rapes and expulsions followed by the demolition of their houses and the subsequent official policy of shooting on sight any Palestinian who dared the attempt to return to his or her property.

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  93. Other than replacing “outdated” with “abrogated,” I’d say Mr. Brewer is entirely correct.

    Actually, I stand corrected. It was not abrogated, and continued to be honored by the British throughout the Mandate period.

  94. @Brewer

    “I have answered all your question”
    1. What possible principle at Law or morality are you invoking to justify such a dispossession?

    I need to reiterate my contention that your arguments are grooved to delegitimize Zionism and Jews, with accusations of about Zionism being evil, deceitful and caused the displacement and ruin of the Palestines Arab inhabitants. It is just too unrealistic and phony.

    I am not invoking any morality to justify the dispossession of Palestinians. Whatever you have read about Palestinian genocide. There are 1.7 million Palestinian citizens in Israel, they are in the Knesset, doctors, judges, heads of hospitals etc. Nuff said. The Palestinian population has quadrupled since 1948. Not much of a genocide plan. The Palestinian citizens of Israel have said they will stay in Israel regardless of a Palestinian state.

    3. I await the substantiation of your assertion that the emigration of Middle East Jews to Israel was equivalent to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. So far your “evidence” (The man in the sharkskin who did not experience any physical intimidation does not make the case).
    You offered a link to support your allegation that Egypt expelled “the Jews” yet one of the few substantive references at that link states “After various contradictory orders had been given, the Egyptian government only expelled a small minority of the Jewish population of Egypt, though since that time a good many Jews have left Egypt of their own accord.” The Lavon Affair in which a group of Egyptian Jews working for Israeli military intelligence planted bombs inside Egyptian, American, and British-owned civilian targets, cinemas, libraries, and American educational centers would seem to be ample justification of any and all expulsions let alone “a small minority”.
    You then re-iterate: “Nasser did expel the Jews.” (implying all) without any substantiation. In my view therefore, I consider that you have not proven even a shred of equivalent

    Too stupid to answer. Everyone knows (with a brain) that Nasser and Pan Arabism had a dark, dark side, was supported by the Russians, trumped up charges, seized property and assets to expel the Jews, or any other political enemy. This was repeated in every Arab muslim state. Just facts. The Muslim Brotherhood started in Egypt, virulently anti Jewish and anti Zionist. the Mufti of Jerusalem aligned with Hitler screaming “kill Jews”.

    Another shift in my thinking occurred when I realized that there exists a massive error in the narrative, a category mistake.
    Not one of the documents pertinent to the re-organization of the Middle East from the Balfour Declaration through San Remo, Sevres, LON et al contemplates the transfer of property rights or a Jewish State. Not one of the participants possessed any right or power to gift real estate. Yet all Zionists such as yourself seem to be under the impression that a pledge to encourage Jewish participation and immigration in in the nascent state meant being given property rights (except some vague reference to making waste lands available for Jewish purchase). I challenge you to produce any document that does so or even remotely describes how such a transfer might be achieved if you disagree.

    More stupid then the last one to answer. I mean I cannot believe that you are challenging the legal documents from the League of Nations. I am not a diplomat or a historian. But for fuck sake this stuff is right out if front and pretty remarkably clear. The Jews are a pretty litigiously savvy group and know full well that the had a legal rights to purchase land. Moses Montefore bought huge swaths of land from absentee Ottoman Sheiks. Are you saying that is illegal? on what bases? The mandate for Palestine was one of many land Mandates from the British. There were similar Mandates for Syria, and for Lebanon. I am also not an international lawyer. Below are two links, one from Wiki, the other by an international expert, validating the Jewish legal claims to the land.
    Case closed for me. I am not continuing to argue on this. Here are some excerpts.

    https://www.mythsandfacts.org/conflict/mandate_for_palestine/mandate_for_palestine.htm

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandate_for_Palestine

    Unlike nation-states in Europe, modern Lebanese, Jordanian, Syrian, and Iraqi nationalities did not evolve. They were arbitrarily created by colonial powers.
    In 1919, in the wake of World War I, England and France as Mandatory (e.g., official administrators and mentors) carved up the former Ottoman Empire, which had collapsed a year earlier, into geographic spheres of influence. This divided the Mideast into new political entities with new names and frontiers.7
    Territory was divided along map meridians without regard for traditional frontiers (i.e., geographic logic and sustainability) or the ethnic composition of indigenous populations.8

    Political Rights in Palestine Were Granted to Jews Only
    The “Mandate for Palestine” clearly differentiates between political rights – referring to Jewish self-determination as an emerging polity – and civil and religious rights, referring to guarantees of equal personal freedoms to non-Jewish residents as individuals and within select communities. Not once are Arabs as a people mentioned in the “Mandate for Palestine.” At no point in the entire document is there any granting of political rights to non-Jewish entities (i.e., Arabs). Article 2 of the “Mandate for Palestine” explicitly states that the Mandatory should:
    “… be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish National Home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.”
    Political rights to self-determination as a polity for Arabs were guaranteed by the League of Nations in four other mandates – in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and later Trans-Jordan [today Jordan].
    International law expert Professor Eugene V. Rostow, examining the claim for Arab Palestinian self-determination on the basis of law, concluded:
    “… the mandate implicitly denies Arab claims to national political rights in the area in favor of the Jews; the mandated territory was in effect reserved to the Jewish people for their self-determination and political development, in acknowledgment of the historic connection of the Jewish people to the land. Lord Curzon, who was then the British Foreign Minister, made this reading of the mandate explicit. There remains simply the theory that the Arab inhabitants of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip have an inherent ‘natural law’ claim to the area. Neither customary international law nor the United Nations Charter acknowledges that every group of people claiming to be a nation has the right to a state of its own.”26 [italics by author]

    “Why don’t answer my question about this inhumanity towards the Palestinians?”
    One of the great tenets of both Bible and Law teaches the principle of restoration or restitution . This fundamentally means that that which is taken away from someone by somebody else should be repaid or restored, returned or given back

    Is the USA giving land back to the Natives? Australia?, New Zealand. The Vikings? Another too stupid to be real question and answer. The UN qualifiers refugees for 2nd generation only, after that the state the refugees are residing in need to be nationalized in that country. Common sense no?
    Jews are not getting their houses back in Germany or Poland. Or Polish people in the Ukraine.

    Finally as I said before. The Jewish archives are pro and con and alive and well. This from one of AS’s links regarding the Arab archives. I maintain that Jews are no worse or better then other peoples. People with an imperative regarding a land dispute will commit crimes. I hope that these were very few and far between. My observations about the Muslim Arabs are their inability to think logically and rationally for the betterment of their people. Jihad and death over economic prosperity and freedom. Keeping populations captive for a religious vendetta. If the Jews lived in Gaza and the Arabs ruled Israel. Gaza would look like Israel. and Israel would look like Gaza. The Jews would be focusing on educating their children, trade and tourism. The Arabs would be worried about killing the Jews in Gaza. Two peoples who think in two different parallel universes unable to coexist.

    On the Arab side, there is no equivalent of the thirty-year-rule. On the 1948 War little access is allowed to the relevant Arab archives and this restriction does pose a serious problem to the researcher. It is sometimes argued that no definitive account of the 1948 War, least of all an account of what happened behind the scenes on the Arab side, is possible without proper access to the Arab state archives. But difficulty should not be construed as impossibility. In the first place, some official Arab documents are available. A prime example is the report of the Iraqi parliamentary committee of inquiry into the Palestine question which is packed with high-level documents.[15] Another example is the collection of official, semi-official and private papers gathered by the Institute for Palestine Studies.[16] In addition, there is a far from negligible literature in Arabic which consists of first-hand accounts of the disaster, including the diaries and memoirs of prominent politicians and soldiers.[17] But even if none of these Arabic sources existed, the other available sources would provide a basis for an informed analysis of the 1948 War. A military historian of the Middle Ages would be green with envy at the sight of the sources available to his contemporary Middle Eastern counterpart. Historians of the 1948 War would do much better to explore in depth the manifold sources that are available to them than to lament the denial of access to the Arab state archives.

  95. As someone who referenced the Ottoman Land Code of 1858, you should be familiar with the terms. Obviously, you can be bothered only to copy and paste rather than actually read and understand the material you cite

    .

    This is funny. I copied and pasted? I think you mean Mr. Brewer.

    Moshe Aumann’s puff piece is a fraud. It does not even mention the various types of land tenure such as Miri, Matruka, Mewat and Mulk and the one time he refers to Waqf he gets it wrong.

    Brewer is referring to the Ottoman Empire’s feudal land system where entire villages were registered under one name. The system was outdated and no longer relevant. So why would Moshe Aumann mention it? When it came to individual land ownership taxation was required. It is common knowledge that the Bedouins did not want to pay taxes so they never registered their land claims. There are currently Bedouins squatting trying to get land claims registered in Israel. Famous cases. Google it. In my opinion Brewer is the cut and paste king (queen) and clueless.

  96. From Article 78 of the Land Code:

    A person who possessed miri or waqf (muqafa) land and cultivated it for ten consecutive years without dispute, has a prescriptive right to the land. Whether he had a title deed (kushan) or not – the land is not considered abandoned (mahlul) and he is given a title deed free of charge. Even if the possessor admits that the land was abandoned (mahlul) and he held it without permission – even though he held it for a few years, he will be offered the land upon payment of its tapou [gross] value, and if he does not so desire, the land will be sold at public auction. [emphasis added]

    Note the phrase “without dispute.” It means that only by an explicit challenge of the state to that person’s use of the land during that ten year period would the de facto possessor confront a potential loss of title. Otherwise, he is considered the owner thereof “whether he had a title deed or not.”

    Furthermore, in Mahmoud Nayef v. Government of Palestine (1946), the Mandatory Supreme Court held that “once the prescriptive title is vested in a person by reason of ten years possession with cultivation it is not necessary, in order that title may be confirmed at settlement, to establish that the claimant continuously cultivated it after the prescriptive period.” [emphasis added]

    Both are part and parcel of applying the Land Code to which Israel, as the occupying power of Palestine, is bound by international law.

    As such, your argument fails. There was no need for those whose use of miri land made them implicit owners thereof to have formally registered title deeds with the respective governments under which they labored in order to retain ownership. Both the British and Jordanian governments of Palestine recognized their ownership as a matter of law.

    You need to brush up on the history of Israel’s declaration policy, which runs in stark contrast to the manner in which preceding governments of Palestine applied the Land Code:

    Under the Guise of Legality: Declarations of state land in the West Bank

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  97. @AnonStarter

    So you know that this is a very confusing discussion with many legal minds weighing in. I should brush up on my Ottoman Land Code law and the way proceeding governments executed the these laws. Is that what you are saying? Because the Ottoman land code is ripe for hysteria, dispute and craziness. If you could read and write which maybe most peasants could not, and you relied on oral assurances. Well what can I say. The site you supplied from B’Tselem is going to be skewed one way and other interpretations another. This is in the weeds stuff. I have a full time job and I am not a international legal scholar on Mandates and land use. From what I read it is hilariously confusing. Maybe you can make a career out of it. Not me.

    I am still trying to figure out how Trans-Jordan became Jordan and all the people living there became refugees. Was any land code applied to that group? It seems to me that Islamist want to disenfranchise Jewish land ownership and delegitimize Israel using any means they can. Islam is never going to accept Jewish ownership of land Muslims think is divinely part of the Ummah, and must never leave Islamic hands. Islam will never accept Judaism as an equal. without major Islamic reformation. So what difference does it make how you interpret the land code? It is all mute at this point. Most people have figured this out that to try and reconcile land codes and ownership with Muslims is (like the peace process ) a oneway trip down a never ending rabbit hole. The ultimate goal of Islam is the elimination of Israel. That is why why you are witnessing they exclusion of Palestinians and Palestinian rights in the larger peace process with the Arab world. At some point it is irreconcilable and you need to move on from the greater good.

    I cannot understand why you have not figured this out yet. These issues will never get resolved to the Muslims satisfaction. The Islamic Jihad against the Jews along with the resistance is over. The only hope for peace and prosperity in the ME is cooperation and acceptance. The oil is dwindling and the super powers are no longer interested in Ottoman land codes. It is all pretty pointless. Peace will come without the Palestinian involvement and after the greater peace a return to this will be done with more realistic people.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  98. @Fran Taubman

    This is in the weeds stuff.

    No, it isn’t, not for someone possessing “intellectual heft.” That’s just the excuse you always pull off the shelf whenever your argument fails — like clockwork every time.

    Let’s see … Since your first response to me in this thread, you conceded that Jews intentionally expelled the Arabs from their homes in 1948, the partition plan was not accepted because it was grossly unfair, the UN did not have the legal (sic) authority to grant the partition plan, and the UN did not grant ownership to the Jews of any part of Palestine. Your hasbara map was decisively debunked and your understanding of the Ottoman Land Code was proven entirely incorrect.

    Fact is, your arguments keep getting demolished, one after the other, because you are utterly incapable of mounting any defense of them, which is why all we’ll ever see from you is further reversion into the same old sorry diversions (e.g. “Jew hatred,” “I’m too busy,” “two sides to the story,” “Islam will never accept …”, “Jihad is over,” etc., etc., etc.).

    Remember this post of mine, addressed to you?

    It’s interesting to watch you argue that Americans are, by and large, not only well informed about Israel, but so confident in their support of her that any perspective which might undermine this support is — “without mitigation” — just that easily rejected.

    If this is so, then why does the Lobby feel it necessary to engage in militant lawfare against a constitutionally protected boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement that you yourself have dismissed as ineffective? Why, in the effort to undermine freedom of speech, have they felt it necessary to expand the definition of anti-Semitism to include even legitimate criticism of Israel? Why have they enlisted the aid of an a-list actor/comedian in the effort to deplatform social media accounts whose owners espouse entirely legitimate criticism of Israel and zionism? Do these actions reveal confidence in the American people’s pro-Israel sentiment, or rather, a sense of fear that the Potemkin facade they’ve erected is beginning to crumble beneath a steadily growing consciousness of zionist misanthropy?

    Your response:

    May I work backwards for a second?
    What is your desired out come? Your end point? Your goal? What would success look like to you?
    With regards to Judaism and Israel. The defeat of Israel and return to Islamic rule but the Palestinians? What is it you want? You are not an Arab from the ME., yet you are so passionate about Zionist and Israel. What would you like to see happen?
    Maybe we can work something out?

    Classic Fran. When informed that you conceded the argument, your excuse was “[i]n a limited forum one has to limit the discussion.”

    “Limit the discussion”? This from one of UR’s most garrulous posters.

    LoL.

  99. @AnonStarter

    Sorry go back to ignore. I think I have been brilliant. I remember when you used to beat me up on how fake Judaism a la Douglas Reed. Ah the good old days.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  100. @AnonStarter

    Hey AS,

    At least I am not alone in my opinions. I circled the globe and weighed in on an amazing amount of topics. But here someone else discussing the Ottoman Land Code of 1858, a legal advocacy guy.

    https://www.jpost.com/opinion/beware-ottoman-land-law-410708

    During the British Mandate and the Jordanian occupation, huge allocations of land were granted to villages and tribes, most of which were never used. Regardless of whether the land was used and taxes were paid, specified as necessary provisos by Ottoman Law, the Jordanian government improperly registered these land grants as privately owned, permanently.

    These registrations are sometimes mistakenly recognized by the legal authority of the State of Israel in Judea and Samaria, the civil administration, to Israel’s detriment. In the case of the encampment near Sussiya, however, the Jordanians also didn’t register a title deed.

    This confusion and factual misrepresentation perpetrated by NGOs such as Rabbis for Human Rights, B’Tselem, Peace Now, Bimkom and Yesh Din, aided by ignorant and misled foreign governments, is used to support and encourage illegal Arab land grabs and the destruction of Jewish communities and properties.

    Can you imagine what the relevant branch of the US government would do if a large group of residents were to illegally set up camp in the middle of a wheat field in Kansas and build homes supported by the European Union.

    Without any justification, accusing the State of Israel of forced displacement and taking “private Palestinian land” has become a favorite canard of the media and anti-Israel foreign organizations.

    Openly distorting the facts about Sussiya is simply used as a club to bludgeon Israel and delegitimize its independent judicial system.

    Any fair-minded person should be wary of the goals of this bogus campaign and distance himself from these activities.

    I pretty much said the same thing and I am not a legal expert.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  101. @Fran Taubman

    Briggs:

    If a person cultivated an area for 10 consecutive years, he could apply for a title deed (OLC Article 78). But, if the land were abandoned (mahlul), at any time, even though he had cultivated it for a few years, he would lose his claim to ownership and the grant.

    Again, even if he could apply and didn’t, or didn’t pay the taxes or the tithes, the land would revert to the governing authority.

    This is clearly a falsification of the Land Code.

    Attorney Moses Doukhan, who served in the land department of the Mandate government:

    If possession is lawful – the holder is only lacking registration, and article 78 of the Code permits him to receive this registration from the authorities… a possessor of miri-mahlul land for ten consecutive years who cultivated it in accordance with the requirement of article 78 does not have to cultivate it continuously after he acquired the right of Usuacapio [acquiring rights through possession and cultivation], and may demand registration of the land on his name in the land registry. [emphasis added]

    Notice that this holding completely belies Briggs’ claim that said registration is a prerequisite for ownership. It is not. Nor does abandonment of the land after the ten year cultivation period negate said ownership.

    The problem for Briggs and like-minded advocates is that they’re proceeding from an interpretation of the Land Code that — in contravention of international law — has deviated from its original application:

    The Mandate authorities and the Jordanian government considered patch cultivation of rocky land to meet the requirements of article 78 of the Ottoman Land Code. Both concluded that such patch cultivation grants the farmer ownership of the entire parcel. This interpretation of article 78 was also established in a ruling by the Mandatory Supreme Court. In contrast, Israel applied in the West Bank a strict reading of article 78. According to its interpretation, in rocky areas, only cultivation encompassing at least 50 percent of the total area of the parcel will grant ownership rights to the farmer. By changing the interpretation of article 78 of the Land Code, which had been customary in the West Bank before 1967, Israel justified its decision to declare large areas of rocky mountain land that were under patch cultivation as government property, despite the position of the states who ruled the West Bank prior to 1967, who considered these lands to be private Palestinian property. In this case, Israel’s interpretation deviated so much from that applied in the area prior to its occupation, that it constitutes a change in the statute itself.

    This is how one should understand Briggs’ allegations concerning lack of cultivation.

    Israel also deviated from previous governments in the manner in which it classified matruka land as government property. Such land had always been held as public land assigned for the specific use of members of a particular community. In violation of the Land Code, Israel usurped matruka land as “state land” and allocated it for the development of illegal settlements.

    Rather ironically, Briggs asks:

    Can you imagine what the relevant branch of the US government would do if a large group of residents were to illegally set up camp in the middle of a wheat field in Kansas and build homes supported by the European Union.

    Better still, can Briggs imagine what the property owners of Palestine would do if a large group of Jewish squatters supported by America were to illegally build settlements in the middle of land their ancestors had cultivated for generations?

    Oh, wait …

    Anyhow, it’s important to bear in mind that Israel can’t change the Land Code under international law, as it remains, according to the Geneva Conventions, an occupying power, subject to all law that applies to occupying powers, including application of pre-existing legislation in the territory it occupies.

    Unfortunately, that’s exactly what it’s done, and Briggs simply hopes we won’t notice.

    Too late.

    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  102. @Fran Taubman

    I remember when you used to beat me up on how fake Judaism a la Douglas Reed.

    Oh, look … Yet another example of Fran not having a clue as to what I’ve said.

    How original.

  103. @AnonStarter

    You have never answered my question as to how Jordan applied the land code inside Jordan? How legally did Jordan disenfranchise citizens? How come Palestinians cannot become citizens? How did Syria apply the land code? You criticize Israel in a vacuum amongst a huge swaths of corruption. Israel does not consider itself an occupying power.

    • Replies: @AnonStarter
  104. @Fran Taubman

    You have never answered my question

    Because the questions are, once again, straw man diversions, irrelevant to the topic of Israel’s war against Palestinians. We already covered this days ago and here you are, at it again, as if you never learned a thing.

    Israel does not consider itself an occupying power.

    It doesn’t matter if Israel considers itself pure as the driven snow. What matters is the standard of international law.

    The Levy Report, for what it’s worth, is nothing new. It’s derived from Yehuda Blum’s 1968 “Missing Revisioner” thesis, an argument that has been roundly rejected by the International Court of Justice. Back in 1980, Sally V. Mallison ably dismantled Blum’s rationale:

    https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-199670/

    (See Second United Nations Seminar on the Question of Palestine, Item F, “A juridical analysis of the Israeli settlements in the occupied territories”.)

    While it’s too long to quote in its entirety here, there is a nice excerpt that’s worthy of attention:

    Second, the claim (of Blum) assumes without supporting evidence that the word “territory” in article 2 of the Convention must be interpreted as being restricted to territory where the displaced Government had the complete formal title as the “legitimate sovereign”. Even if the claim that Jordan annexed the West Bank unlawfully should be accepted for purposes of legal argument, this does not mean that this territory is not “the territory of a High Contracting Party” within the meaning of article 2. It has never been previously doubted that the word “territory” as used here includes, in addition to de jure title, a mere de facto title to the territory. The words “legitimate sovereign” upon which so much emphasis is placed do not appear in the Convention or its negotiating history.22/

    An interesting aspect of this claim is that much emphasis is placed upon the allegation that only two States, the United Kingdom and Pakistan, recognized the Jordanian action and this is deemed to demonstrate its invalidity. Dr. Nathan Feinberg, who is professor emeritus of international law at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, has pointed out that this is a vulnerable argument since no States have recognized the Israeli annexation of Jerusalem – and he refers specifically to West Jerusalem.23/

    In other words, Israel’s argument would hoist it by its own petard, making the case that its alleged title to Jerusalem is similarly invalid. Long story short, Blum — and, by extension, Levy — have no real means by which they can dismiss Israel’s role as an occupying power, since the standard of international law — to which they themselves claim to appeal — places them firmly in that category.

    And since they are bound to conduct themselves as an occupying power, their alteration of the pre-existing Land Code — accomplished with the aim of dispossessing Palestinians of property they want for themselves — is also a violation of international law.

    I’m still waiting for you to demonstrate an understanding of the material you cite. It’s rather obvious to anyone reading this thread that you’re just finding material and throwing it out there without any regard for the details of it.

    Which is why, when I address those details with an understanding of them, you consistently lose your arguments.

    Every. Single. Time.

    • Agree: Brewer
    • Replies: @Fran Taubman
  105. I’m still waiting for you to demonstrate an understanding of the material you cite. It’s rather obvious to anyone reading this thread that you’re just finding material and throwing it out there without any regard for the details of it.

    Which is why, when I address those details with an understanding of them, you consistently lose your arguments.

    Every. Single. Time.

    I am miffed on why you continue to make comments like this. You view these arguments as a competition with a winner and a loser, and I am always the loser. It is beyond stupid to think like this.

    I have consistently given you the Zionist point of view which I learned growing up in a post ww2 with, with religious Zionist parents around a Zionist family, with Zionist historians, I was born in 1953 pretty close to the end of the war with a family of survivors. I continue to maintain Zionist contacts which is the source for my information. These friends and family are writers, historians etc. They are the author of books. They are not losers. Zionist have a point of you whether you like it or not. Are you just dense or what? You are not wining. Anti Zionist are not wining.

    Once again, after the ww2 Judaism was on life support. To Jews, the very survival of Judaism depended on the establishment of the state of Israel and the ability of Jews to control their own destiny. A life and death struggle, even if caused the displacement of the Palestinian people. The Jews could have been defeated and squashed and eliminated in this struggle, but they won. Other struggles in human history have taken a similar trajectory. That is the way of the world. I am not looking to be self righteous and tell you Zionism is all good. I am telling you that it is a necessity for the survival of the Jewish people.

    At times I have tried to point our the hypocrisy of Islam in its accusations about Judaism and Israel, and the fact that the establishment of Israel did not have to go down the way it did, but again in your opinion I am the loser and you are the winner. What are we 4 years old? You already have a gold star by your name. Isn’t that enough. Your ego so in need of victories, makes boring conversations.

  106. @AnonStarter

    Two members of my family involved in Judaism, Zionism, and Jewish history. People I get my information from, or who have educated me.

    https://emetonline.org/advisory/alex-grobman/
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efraim_Zuroff

    Spelling correction in my last post winning, not wining.

  107. Because the questions are, once again, straw man diversions, irrelevant to the topic of Israel’s war against Palestinians. We already covered this days ago and here you are, at it again, as if you never learned a thing

    Jordan is not a straw man argument. You claim the mandate could not legally grant land rights to the Jews, but no problem giving Trans Jordan to the Hashemites. Same people same legality. Why didn’t the PLO declare a Palestinian state prior to 1968 in the illegal Jordanian occupied West Bank? These circular arguments is the reason why the Palestinian land claims will never be executed under International Law.

    In 1948 Israel declared statehood when the Arabs unanimously rejected UN Resolution #181, they fell back on the only legally binding treaty of the disposition of the land, the Mandate of Palestine, that mandate gave them all the land in Gaza, Israel and the West Bank.
    The mandate states as such:
    The Palestine Mandate
    The Council of the League of Nations:
    Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people…. The Palestine Mandate

    While the Mandate specifies that the Mandate may not make the Arabs as a people without rights, it in no place says they have a sovereign right to the land, the land is only for the Jews.
    In 1948 in rejection of Israel’s act the Arabs invaded in mass, they lost, Israel not only stood, but then grabbed more, but not all the land promised under the mandate. Gaza was occupied by the Egyptians, Judea and Samaria, renamed the West Bank by the Jordanians was also occupied.
    Both area’s immediately either slaughtered or evicted all Jews living in the area, then moved Arabs in. The West Bank moved in hundreds of thousands of Arabs between 1948 and 1950 to bring more legitimacy to Jordans intent to annex the land, in 1950 they did.They illegally occupied the land they possessed until 1967 after a coalition of Arabs first massed their armies on the Israeli border, then put in place a blockade to cut off Israel through the Straits of Tiran, a violation under international law, if you do this according to the law, this is a act of war (Blockade | warfare). Israel responded in kind, after giving warning, the Arabs informed Israel they wanted them to attack, they got their wish, were quickly driven out.
    So the question has to be, if the land was occupied by Jordan, it was set aside by the Mandate of Palestine for Israel, and they expelled them, how is it occupied.
    But let’s dig further, what was the Arab reaction to this land, did Fatah, or the PLO make any claim to this land when under Egyptian and Jordanian rule?
    Let’s look at their first charter, specifically article 24 of the Palestinian 1964 National Charter:
    Article 24. This Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah Area. Its activities will be on the national popular level in the liberational, organizational, political and financial fields.
    (“Background”. Archived from the original on October 9, 2006. Retrieved 2005-05-29. in “Palestine Liberation Organization. Archived from the original on April 24, 2005. Retrieved 2005-05-23.)What is interesting, while under Arab rule, there was no claim on the land, nor was there any offer of sovereignty by the Arabs, but in 1968 they rewrote their charter, now they said their historical right was to the land that they just 4 years before they said they had no right to. So what was the catalyst of this?
    Turns out the 6 day war, so I must ask, has anyone ever heard of a historical claim changing according to who controls the land.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Jonathan Cook Comments via RSS