Palestine Today

[Coyote]

An old street in Nablus at night. Photo by Khalil Kawa.

Another very striking photo, beautiful done

 

[Coyote]

Muslims Demand "Right of Return" to Spain

Muslim groups are demanding Spanish citizenship for potentially millions of descendants of Muslims who were expelled from Spain during the Middle Ages.

The growing clamor for "historical justice" comes after the recent approval of a law that would grant Spanish citizenship to descendants of Sephardic Jews expelled from Spain in 1492.

Muslim supporters say they are entitled to the same rights and privileges as Jews because both groups were expelled from Spain under similar historical circumstances.

But historians point out that the Jewish presence in Spain predates the arrival of Christianity in the country and that their expulsion was a matter of bigotry. By contrast, the Muslims in Spain were colonial occupiers who called the territory Al-Andalus and imposed Arabic as the official language. Historians say their expulsion was a matter of decolonization.

They seem to demand a "Right of Return" to many places they've once INVADED...

Why should they not have the same set of rights? Neither group ORIGINATED in Spain, both were brutally expelled (and killed, and forcibly converted).

You seem to operate on two completely different sets of standards depending on the ethnicity of the victims.

 

[Coyote]

I see that someone marked my post about Nazareth being in Israel proper and Nablus being in the West Bank "informative." Now, l don't want to sound harsh, but before people post here on the Israel/Palestine Board, they should really educate themselves about the location of cities within the area in question. These are the most basic facts and information about the conflict. Better yet, even try to visit the area, because what you see and experience in reality might be very different from what the media portrays.

So we shouldn't mark it as informative? I'm not aware of exactly where different cities are. But then - I also haven't commented on those cities either.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Gaza starts @ 40:18
Abby Martin on Hillary's NeoMcCarthyism and 'Gaza Fights for Freedom,' Plus #BerniesBack

 

[rylah]

Muslims Demand "Right of Return" to Spain

Muslim groups are demanding Spanish citizenship for potentially millions of descendants of Muslims who were expelled from Spain during the Middle Ages.

The growing clamor for "historical justice" comes after the recent approval of a law that would grant Spanish citizenship to descendants of Sephardic Jews expelled from Spain in 1492.

Muslim supporters say they are entitled to the same rights and privileges as Jews because both groups were expelled from Spain under similar historical circumstances.

But historians point out that the Jewish presence in Spain predates the arrival of Christianity in the country and that their expulsion was a matter of bigotry. By contrast, the Muslims in Spain were colonial occupiers who called the territory Al-Andalus and imposed Arabic as the official language. Historians say their expulsion was a matter of decolonization.

They seem to demand a "Right of Return" to many places they've once INVADED...

Why should they not have the same set of rights? Neither group ORIGINATED in Spain, both were brutally expelled (and killed, and forcibly converted).

You seem to operate on two completely different sets of standards depending on the ethnicity of the victims.

The Islamic State's Claim to Spain | The New York Times



Well the answer was in the article:
unlike Jews, your Islamist buddies actually invaded the country subjugating the entire peninsula through murder and war. Unlike the fake propaganda of "coexistence" under their rule, many Jewish communities had to flee their barbarity and eventual attempt to forcibly convert people of whom the famous Jewish sage, Maimonides and his family along with many more happen to be a good example.

Also probably because unlike Jews to whom this right was recently granted by the king looking forward to their development of the society for the sake of all, your Islamist buddies just demand it while proposing nothing but degradation and various terror acts like suicide bombing.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Abby Martin Introduces Her Documentary - "Gaza fights for Freedom"

 

[Shusha]

Abby Martin Introduces Her Documentary - "Gaza fights for Freedom"

Is there a reason she’s not wearing a shirt?

 

[Shusha]

Abby Martin Introduces Her Documentary - "Gaza fights for Freedom"

"Documentary".

 

[Shusha]

Why should they not have the same set of rights? Neither group ORIGINATED in Spain, both were brutally expelled (and killed, and forcibly converted).

You seem to operate on two completely different sets of standards depending on the ethnicity of the victims.

Except, if you read rylah's post, you would see that it is NOT based on ethnicity, but on circumstance.

This is an extremely nuanced conversation. There are a number of complicated subjects involved:

• What is the intent of return?
• What is the ideology fueling return?
• Can we and should we right "past wrongs"?
• How far back should we go?
• What would be considered a "wrong"?
• Does the process of decolonization require expulsion?
• Is expulsion ever justified? If so, under what circumstances?
• Can return of conquerers, even by legal means, be considered a re-conquest?

There is a lot to unpack here.

 

[Coyote]

Why should they not have the same set of rights? Neither group ORIGINATED in Spain, both were brutally expelled (and killed, and forcibly converted).

You seem to operate on two completely different sets of standards depending on the ethnicity of the victims.

Except, if you read rylah's post, you would see that it is NOT based on ethnicity, but on circumstance.

This is an extremely nuanced conversation. There are a number of complicated subjects involved:

• What is the intent of return?
• What is the ideology fueling return?
• Can we and should we right "past wrongs"?
• How far back should we go?
• What would be considered a "wrong"?
• Does the process of decolonization require expulsion?
• Is expulsion ever justified? If so, under what circumstances?
• Can return of conquerers, even by legal means, be considered a re-conquest?

There is a lot to unpack here.

Yes. There is. But is that nuance present in Rylah’s post? It reads more along the lines of the all to common Muslims are evil” theme.

Now any demand coming from IS is not to be taken seriously and the obvious agenda is obvious IS).


But underneath that is more complex since I doubt IS realizes that one of the main targets of expulsion were Moriscos, who were Muslims who were converted forceably, by royal decree to Christianity. Seems descendants of that group are the ones asking for the same rights as the Jews, but so far with little success. The irony is IS would kill people like that.

Your questions are good ones.

• What is the intent of return?

Good question

• What is the ideology fueling return?

Also a good question

• Can we and should we right "past wrongs"?

Complicated question...as you put it before and I agree, we can’t unscramble eggs

• How far back should we go?

Exactly. What is the magic date?

• What would be considered a "wrong"?

Also a good question, and add to that how to you go about judging things that occurred under a completely different culture, set of norms and values than we have today?

• Does the process of decolonization require expulsion?

No. And imo, “decolonization is as much a crime as “Colonization” since involves violating the rights of long settled and now native peoples. That would be attempting to unscramble eggs.

• Is expulsion ever justified? If so, under what circumstances?

As a group, no. Once justified...it become easier and easier to justify for less and less.

• Can return of conquerers, even by legal means, be considered a re-conquest?

Hard to answer. For example, is simply being the same ethnicity as a group that one conquered another thousands of years ago means they are the same? And how far back do you go? Many peoples exist where they are because they conquered some one else. You can’t untangle all of that.

I have said this before, I don’t believe in any “right of return” down through the generations. In other words, once those expelled are gone, so is any right. The only “right” is what a state chooses to grant a group.

But if you are trying to right a wrong, the Moriscos, forceably converted, distrusted and attacked by both Christians and Muslims in Spain, and expelled would certainly seem to qualify.

 

[Shusha]

Yes. There is. But is that nuance present in Rylah’s post?

Not especially. But it isn't in yours either.

It reads more along the lines of the all to common Muslims are evil” theme.

No, it doesn't. He specifically used the term "Islamist", indicating he is speaking of a very distinct group of extremists.

Now any demand coming from IS is not to be taken seriously ...

IS as in Islamic State? On the contrary, they should be taken very seriously.

 

[Shusha]

I have said this before, I don’t believe in any “right of return” down through the generations. In other words, once those expelled are gone, so is any right.

I both agree and disagree with this.

On the disagree side, I worry that this opens the door to abuse. In that it creates the condition of making expulsion a viable method of removing rights from people. We should guard against that.

On the agree side, I don't think that one should have a "right to return" to any territory or State where one or some of your ancestors once lived. That seems a bit ridiculous to me. On the other hand, there is a difference between forced expulsion and voluntary migration, with respect to retention of rights.

I think individual "right of return" and collective rights to self-determination are two different things and should be distinguished from each other. Individual "right of return" can not be passed down to generations. However, collective rights to self-determination include the right to live on the territory of that self-determination. Did that make sense?

 

[Coyote]

Yes. There is. But is that nuance present in Rylah’s post?

Not especially. But it isn't in yours either.

It reads more along the lines of the all to common Muslims are evil” theme.

No, it doesn't. He specifically used the term "Islamist", indicating he is speaking of a very distinct group of extremists.

Now any demand coming from IS is not to be taken seriously ...

IS as in Islamic State? On the contrary, they should be taken very seriously.

No. What was not taken seriously was a demand of a right of return.

And no...he used the term Islamist buddies, referring to historic Muslims, putting ISIS in the same category as historic Muslims, his distinct group was in reality very broad.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Heart-wrenching: Family of the Palestinian martyr Alaa Hamdan after they bade farewell to him in the hospital morgue. Alaa was shot and killed by an Israeli sniper in the Great March of Return protests in Gaza today.4

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Heart-wrenching: Family of the Palestinian martyr Alaa Hamdan after they bade farewell to him in the hospital morgue. Alaa was shot and killed by an Israeli sniper in the Great March of Return protests in Gaza today.4

Why did he deliberately put himself in harm's way?

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Coyote]

I have said this before, I don’t believe in any “right of return” down through the generations. In other words, once those expelled are gone, so is any right.

I both agree and disagree with this.

On the disagree side, I worry that this opens the door to abuse. In that it creates the condition of making expulsion a viable method of removing rights from people. We should guard against that.

On the agree side, I don't think that one should have a "right to return" to any territory or State where one or some of your ancestors once lived. That seems a bit ridiculous to me. On the other hand, there is a difference between forced expulsion and voluntary migration, with respect to retention of rights.

I think individual "right of return" and collective rights to self-determination are two different things and should be distinguished from each other. Individual "right of return" can not be passed down to generations. However, collective rights to self-determination include the right to live on the territory of that self-determination. Did that make sense?

It makes sense but it still seems problematic...maybe you could elaborate.

Are "collective rights to self determination" being conflated with "collective rights to return"? And if so...that would seem to me to then open the door for the Palestinians right to return.

The only "collective right" is that which the state grants. If there were no state of Israel to grant that right to the Jews, it would not exist. That sort of applies to all collective rights of return imo.

 

[Shusha]

I have said this before, I don’t believe in any “right of return” down through the generations. In other words, once those expelled are gone, so is any right.

I both agree and disagree with this.

On the disagree side, I worry that this opens the door to abuse. In that it creates the condition of making expulsion a viable method of removing rights from people. We should guard against that.

On the agree side, I don't think that one should have a "right to return" to any territory or State where one or some of your ancestors once lived. That seems a bit ridiculous to me. On the other hand, there is a difference between forced expulsion and voluntary migration, with respect to retention of rights.

I think individual "right of return" and collective rights to self-determination are two different things and should be distinguished from each other. Individual "right of return" can not be passed down to generations. However, collective rights to self-determination include the right to live on the territory of that self-determination. Did that make sense?

It makes sense but it still seems problematic...maybe you could elaborate.

Are "collective rights to self determination" being conflated with "collective rights to return"? And if so...that would seem to me to then open the door for the Palestinians right to return.

Self-determination has to MEAN something, right? It is intended for a peoples of a specific culture, originating on that territory, to create a space where that particular culture colors the landscape. Its values, its language, its holiday celebrations, its particular rhythm of life, its ideology is the ice cream flavor of the day, every day. Right? Otherwise the entire idea of self-determination has no value.

(This doesn't mean that other cultures are unable to practice and live their culture. And their culture should be protected, but that its just not the color of the sky, you know?)

So, given that the goal is two states (likely actually four) -- each with their own color -- the collective right of return involves returning to the state which offers your color. It gives people the collective right to live under their own sky.

Individuals who would rather return to their own specific home, would have individual rights to do so. But their descendants would not.

Clear?

 

[P F Tinmore]

RALLY IN DETROIT WITH REP. TLAIB

Rally starts @ 30:00.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The entrance of Al-Khader Church, northeast of Ramallah, which was built in the fifth century AD and is one of the oldest churches in Palestine.