Israel's Legal Right To Exist

[Hollie]

You are making things up. The drafters of the resolution had no reason to specify the fact that the Arab population owned 85% of the land if it were not the case. You are just trying to rewrite history. The usual Zionist attempt at justifying the theft of land. It is becoming ridiculous to argue with people that make up fairy tales when the facts are available in black and white.


"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land. "

There is no qualification, no reservation or caveat in that statement. Your prevarication is just a lie, you are trying to skirt the truth with bullshit.

You comment depicts a fundamental ignorance of the facts


Turkey transfers Ottoman land records to Palestinian Authority

Even before 1917, Jewish and Zionist institutions had purchased large tracts of land in Palestine from absentee landlords, who lived mainly in Syria and Lebanon. These landlords had previously leased their property to local farmers, but were happy to sell it for the right price, without giving a thought to their tenant farmers. Nevertheless, Palestinians view these sales as more legitimate than those that took place during the British occupation that began in 1917.

 

[montelatici]

I'm not saying that they were making it up. I'm saying you are conflating private ownership of Arab residents with other things.

Canada is in possession of 100% of her land is NOT the same thing as saying 100% of land in Canada is privately owned by people who are residents of Canada. There are vast tracts of wilderness in Canada. Its State land (we call it Crown land). Its not privately owned by individual Canadians.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Why is it so difficult to understand that when the UN stated that the Arab population owned 85% of the land, they meant that the Arab population owned 98% of the land. Now if you want to go into the difference between monarchies where the royal family (the crown) owns land that isn't privately owned, and other forms of government in which land that is not publicly owned is owned by the inhabitants/citizens, then that's another discussion.

 

[Hollie]

I'm not saying that they were making it up. I'm saying you are conflating private ownership of Arab residents with other things.

Canada is in possession of 100% of her land is NOT the same thing as saying 100% of land in Canada is privately owned by people who are residents of Canada. There are vast tracts of wilderness in Canada. Its State land (we call it Crown land). Its not privately owned by individual Canadians.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Why is it so difficult to understand that when the UN stated that the Arab population owned 85% of the land, they meant that the Arab population owned 98% of the land. Now if you want to go into the difference between monarchies where the royal family (the crown) owns land that isn't privately owned, and other forms of government in which land that is not publicly owned is owned by the inhabitants/citizens, then that's another discussion.

That's exactly the discussion you're not able to understand.

Turkey transfers Ottoman land records to Palestinian Authority

Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land. Some of this land was later sold or transferred to pre-state Jewish institutions. Other portions belonged to the Muslim waqf (religious trust), and these, according to Islamic law, cannot be sold. However, there was no orderly registration process; ownership was determined primarily using records such as tax payments.



So, as you should be able to -finally - understand, your false representation regarding land ownership is so determined.

 

[montelatici]

I'm not saying that they were making it up. I'm saying you are conflating private ownership of Arab residents with other things.

Canada is in possession of 100% of her land is NOT the same thing as saying 100% of land in Canada is privately owned by people who are residents of Canada. There are vast tracts of wilderness in Canada. Its State land (we call it Crown land). Its not privately owned by individual Canadians.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Why is it so difficult to understand that when the UN stated that the Arab population owned 85% of the land, they meant that the Arab population owned 98% of the land. Now if you want to go into the difference between monarchies where the royal family (the crown) owns land that isn't privately owned, and other forms of government in which land that is not publicly owned is owned by the inhabitants/citizens, then that's another discussion.

That's exactly the discussion you're not able to understand.

Turkey transfers Ottoman land records to Palestinian Authority

Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land. Some of this land was later sold or transferred to pre-state Jewish institutions. Other portions belonged to the Muslim waqf (religious trust), and these, according to Islamic law, cannot be sold. However, there was no orderly registration process; ownership was determined primarily using records such as tax payments.



So, as you should be able to -finally - understand, your false representation regarding land ownership is so determined.

There is nothing false about the UN's representation of land ownership. It is fact. And. the news article you quote does not say anything different from the official UN statement.

 

[Hollie]

I'm not saying that they were making it up. I'm saying you are conflating private ownership of Arab residents with other things.

Canada is in possession of 100% of her land is NOT the same thing as saying 100% of land in Canada is privately owned by people who are residents of Canada. There are vast tracts of wilderness in Canada. Its State land (we call it Crown land). Its not privately owned by individual Canadians.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Why is it so difficult to understand that when the UN stated that the Arab population owned 85% of the land, they meant that the Arab population owned 98% of the land. Now if you want to go into the difference between monarchies where the royal family (the crown) owns land that isn't privately owned, and other forms of government in which land that is not publicly owned is owned by the inhabitants/citizens, then that's another discussion.

That's exactly the discussion you're not able to understand.

Turkey transfers Ottoman land records to Palestinian Authority

Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land. Some of this land was later sold or transferred to pre-state Jewish institutions. Other portions belonged to the Muslim waqf (religious trust), and these, according to Islamic law, cannot be sold. However, there was no orderly registration process; ownership was determined primarily using records such as tax payments.



So, as you should be able to -finally - understand, your false representation regarding land ownership is so determined.

There is nothing false about the UN's representation of land ownership. It is fact. And. the news article you quote does not say anything different from the official UN statement.

Actually, the UN article is both false and non-factual.

"Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land"

You're having difficulty understanding so I'll lend an assist. Read the quoted text above. Read it again.

Anything?

 

[Hossfly]

I'm not saying that they were making it up. I'm saying you are conflating private ownership of Arab residents with other things.

Canada is in possession of 100% of her land is NOT the same thing as saying 100% of land in Canada is privately owned by people who are residents of Canada. There are vast tracts of wilderness in Canada. Its State land (we call it Crown land). Its not privately owned by individual Canadians.

Why is this so hard to understand?

We have something similar to that here. It is called the Bureau of Land Management, and they administer thousands and thousands of acres of public lands for our government.

 

[montelatici]

I'm not saying that they were making it up. I'm saying you are conflating private ownership of Arab residents with other things.

Canada is in possession of 100% of her land is NOT the same thing as saying 100% of land in Canada is privately owned by people who are residents of Canada. There are vast tracts of wilderness in Canada. Its State land (we call it Crown land). Its not privately owned by individual Canadians.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Why is it so difficult to understand that when the UN stated that the Arab population owned 85% of the land, they meant that the Arab population owned 98% of the land. Now if you want to go into the difference between monarchies where the royal family (the crown) owns land that isn't privately owned, and other forms of government in which land that is not publicly owned is owned by the inhabitants/citizens, then that's another discussion.

That's exactly the discussion you're not able to understand.

Turkey transfers Ottoman land records to Palestinian Authority

Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land. Some of this land was later sold or transferred to pre-state Jewish institutions. Other portions belonged to the Muslim waqf (religious trust), and these, according to Islamic law, cannot be sold. However, there was no orderly registration process; ownership was determined primarily using records such as tax payments.



So, as you should be able to -finally - understand, your false representation regarding land ownership is so determined.

There is nothing false about the UN's representation of land ownership. It is fact. And. the news article you quote does not say anything different from the official UN statement.

Actually, the UN article is both false and non-factual.

"Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land"

You're having difficulty understanding so I'll lend an assist. Read the quoted text above. Read it again.

Anything?

You have difficulty in understanding that the Ottoman records, even if they were applicable, don't state anything of the sort. You are just making things up as usual. The UN stated the facts, as they had to do prior to partition.

 

[Hossfly]

I'm not saying that they were making it up. I'm saying you are conflating private ownership of Arab residents with other things.

Canada is in possession of 100% of her land is NOT the same thing as saying 100% of land in Canada is privately owned by people who are residents of Canada. There are vast tracts of wilderness in Canada. Its State land (we call it Crown land). Its not privately owned by individual Canadians.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Why is it so difficult to understand that when the UN stated that the Arab population owned 85% of the land, they meant that the Arab population owned 98% of the land. Now if you want to go into the difference between monarchies where the royal family (the crown) owns land that isn't privately owned, and other forms of government in which land that is not publicly owned is owned by the inhabitants/citizens, then that's another discussion.

That's exactly the discussion you're not able to understand.

Turkey transfers Ottoman land records to Palestinian Authority

Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land. Some of this land was later sold or transferred to pre-state Jewish institutions. Other portions belonged to the Muslim waqf (religious trust), and these, according to Islamic law, cannot be sold. However, there was no orderly registration process; ownership was determined primarily using records such as tax payments.



So, as you should be able to -finally - understand, your false representation regarding land ownership is so determined.

There is nothing false about the UN's representation of land ownership. It is fact. And. the news article you quote does not say anything different from the official UN statement.

Actually, the UN article is both false and non-factual.

"Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land"

You're having difficulty understanding so I'll lend an assist. Read the quoted text above. Read it again.

Anything?

I read an interesting article today. I wonder if the author's wife's grandparents didn't see all these so-called Palestinians earlier in their lives, how in the world did these poor Arabs who came from impoverished countries all of a sudden become landowners? They were probably what we call sharecroppers here.

'The grandparents of the author's wife were born in the Holy Land in the 19th century. They saw with their own eyes how empty the land was at the time. They also lived through and experienced first-hand the British conquest and the Arab immigration that followed. This immigration ended in 1948 with the evacuation of the British from the land and the declaration of the state of Israel. "

The Arabs in the Holy Land - Natives or Aliens?

 

[Phoenall]

You are the only one confused. The UN made it clear who owned the land. Why would the UN make such a claim in the pre-partition resolution? When they stated clearly in Resolution A/364 that:

"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land. "

Do you think it was a typo? LOL

Nope but you are wishing it was right now as possession is not the same as owned is it. I steal your car and I have possession of it, but I dont own it.

 

[Phoenall]

The land was owned by the Palestinian Arabs and stolen by the Jews, since they only owned 6% of the land before partition.

You are beginning to sound like this:

View attachment 102179


Posting the same table, over and over, which has already been shown not to say what you think it says isn't furthering your argument. Especially when the foreword to your table explains that the the column "Arabs and other non-Jews" includes everything not privately owned by Jews. Its the total land area of "Palestine" minus the privately owned Jewish land. Claiming that 16 million dunums of uncultivated and uncultivable land in the wilderness and desert is privately owned by Arab residents of Palestine is ridiculous. Claiming that there was virtually no state land is ridiculous. Claiming that there were no foreign Arab owners of land is ridiculous.

You cant tell him anything, he has a degree in propaganda so knows everything there is to know about everything. He started out posting two pages from that novel until it was pointed out they did not match and said different things. Then when the truth was produced about the committee and its holiday in Jerusalem he ignored it and claimed it was Jewish propaganda.He also ignores the fact that trans Jordan was included in many figures to pad them out, otherwise they looked as if "palestine" was an empty land.

Most important we should be careful not to piss him off with documented facts. Where would we go for fun & laughs if he leaves us?

You have no documented facts, moron. You only have bad propaganda that attempts to justify the Jewish land grab.

"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land.

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3

"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land. "




Note the deliberate use of the word possession and not the word owned, seems that you are having problems comprehending English again. Or you are trying to manipulate the actual meaning of the article to meet with your POV.

 

[Phoenall]

You are the only one confused. The UN made it clear who owned the land. Why would the UN make such a claim in the pre-partition resolution? When they stated clearly in Resolution A/364 that:

"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land. "

Do you think it was a typo? LOL

Not a typo. It was taken from a report which assigned all land not under direct private Jewish ownership to "Arabs". And you are using it, incorrectly and disingenuously as legally or morally relevant and somehow legally or morally binding.

Again, even if 85% of the land was privately owned by resident Arab Palestinians (completely and totally false), it still means absolutely nothing with respect to sovereignty. The ethnicity the person in private ownership of a parcel of land does not affect sovereignty. The fact that there are whole neighborhoods of people of a specific ethnicity (think Little Italy or Chinatown) own private property does not make these neighborhoods the sovereign territory of Italy or China.

I am seriously at a loss as to why you continue to bring this subject up. Its meaningless drivel.

Because it is what he does until the other board members get sick of his spamming and then have him banned. Ask him about it and see what he says.

 

[Phoenall]

You are making things up. The drafters of the resolution had no reason to specify the fact that the Arab population owned 85% of the land if it were not the case. You are just trying to rewrite history. The usual Zionist attempt at justifying the theft of land. It is becoming ridiculous to argue with people that make up fairy tales when the facts are available in black and white.


"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land. "

There is no qualification, no reservation or caveat in that statement. Your prevarication is just a lie, you are trying to skirt the truth with bullshit.

But they didnt say that did they, they said they had possession of the land. If I entered your home while you were away through an open window and stayed there then I would be in possession of it. But I could never Own it as it is not mine.

It is you that LIES all the time to support and justify your Jew hatred

 

[Phoenall]

I'm not saying that they were making it up. I'm saying you are conflating private ownership of Arab residents with other things.

Canada is in possession of 100% of her land is NOT the same thing as saying 100% of land in Canada is privately owned by people who are residents of Canada. There are vast tracts of wilderness in Canada. Its State land (we call it Crown land). Its not privately owned by individual Canadians.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Because he thinks like a muslim in concepts of dar al harb and dar al islam

 

[P F Tinmore]

Is settler colonialism legitimate?

 

[Hollie]

I'm not saying that they were making it up. I'm saying you are conflating private ownership of Arab residents with other things.

Canada is in possession of 100% of her land is NOT the same thing as saying 100% of land in Canada is privately owned by people who are residents of Canada. There are vast tracts of wilderness in Canada. Its State land (we call it Crown land). Its not privately owned by individual Canadians.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Why is it so difficult to understand that when the UN stated that the Arab population owned 85% of the land, they meant that the Arab population owned 98% of the land. Now if you want to go into the difference between monarchies where the royal family (the crown) owns land that isn't privately owned, and other forms of government in which land that is not publicly owned is owned by the inhabitants/citizens, then that's another discussion.

That's exactly the discussion you're not able to understand.

Turkey transfers Ottoman land records to Palestinian Authority

Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land. Some of this land was later sold or transferred to pre-state Jewish institutions. Other portions belonged to the Muslim waqf (religious trust), and these, according to Islamic law, cannot be sold. However, there was no orderly registration process; ownership was determined primarily using records such as tax payments.



So, as you should be able to -finally - understand, your false representation regarding land ownership is so determined.

There is nothing false about the UN's representation of land ownership. It is fact. And. the news article you quote does not say anything different from the official UN statement.

Actually, the UN article is both false and non-factual.

"Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land"

You're having difficulty understanding so I'll lend an assist. Read the quoted text above. Read it again.

Anything?

You have difficulty in understanding that the Ottoman records, even if they were applicable, don't state anything of the sort. You are just making things up as usual. The UN stated the facts, as they had to do prior to partition.

You have difficulty understanding the Ottoman land records because they refute your position. You are just inventing an argument because you have nothing to bolster your argument.

 

[Phoenall]

Is settler colonialism legitimate?

You think it is when it is being done by arab muslims, as you claim they are the legal land owners without producing any proof,

 

[MJB12741]

Is settler colonialism legitimate?

Had it not been for the Arab countries uniting to annihilate Israel there would have been no captured land to build settlements on. Golly gee, do you think maybe the Arabs made a big mistake that harmed the Palestinians?

 

[MJB12741]

Is settler colonialism legitimate?

Had it not been for the Arab countries uniting to annihilate Israel there would have been no captured land to build settlements on. Golly gee, do you think maybe the Arabs made a big mistake that harmed the Palestinians?

 

[Hollie]

Is settler colonialism legitimate?

Ask that question in the context of Islamism. You should learn your koranology and study Islamist history. That history is one of war, rapine, conquest and colonialism beginning after the death of Islam's inventor.

 

[MJB12741]

Is settler colonialism legitimate?

Ask that question in the context of Islamism. You should learn your koranology and study Islamist history. That history is one of war, rapine, conquest and colonialism beginning after the death of Islam's inventor.

True. All Muslim countries are stolen countries conquered by force. Case in point --- "It's Istanbul, not Constantinople." And what happened to native Zoroastrians of Iran after Islamic rule?