"Settlements destroy chance for peace" - Caroline Glick's amazing reality-check

[toastman]

The term 'Ethnic Cleansing' is just part of the Arab propaganda campaign used to demonize Israel. It's a big fat lie.
Electronic Intifada ?!! Really Sherri ?? You accuse of of posting propaganda and you come up with this propaganda site ?? That's desperation right there folks ! Kind of sad that you would resort to that site.

 

[MHunterB]

Palestinians have no responsibility for acts of Jordan. And I dont believe your claim is true. There is no Truth in a Zionist.

So the entire spread in LIFE magazine was what, then?
It's sure looking like you'd rather spit idiotic 'insults' than attempt to dscuss actual events.

DUH - the relevance is, since the Jordanians had no right to ethnically cleanse the Jewish population of East Jerusalem, the Palestinians have no right to be in any home that was so forcibly vacated. Certainly they could have no moral right - most particularly if they want to lay claim to what they assert was 'stolen' from them.

As Palestinians shouldn't be 'punished' for what Jordanians did - neither should they be rewarded for it.

ZIONIST Propaganda is what it was and they did not even use the word ethnic cleansing the poster here chose to use.

So the spread in LIFE magazine was 'Zionist propaganda'? How do you figure that? And what's more important, the word or the idea? They couldn't use the word in LIFE because it didn't exist then: that 'objection' is just stupid.

 

[toastman]

"It is this history of ethnic cleansing, particularly that of the catastrophe of 1948 when three-quarters of the indigenous Palestinian population were forced from their land and property, an event termed the Nakba, that fuels the solidarity work among Palestinians in Jerusalem. Following the lead of Umm Kamel al-Kurd who put up a tent near her home in Sheikh Jarrah after she was forcibly removed from her home four months ago, other neighborhoods in Jerusalem facing a similar fate have set up such tents as spaces for organizing and encouraging others to stand in solidarity with each neighborhood. Such tents exist now on the Mount of Olives and in Ras Khamis. One of the organizers of the solidarity tent in al-Bustan, Ahmed Siam, told me “We will not let history repeat itself. We learned from history. We will not leave our land like we did in 1948. If they come and kill my son, I will not leave. This is our land. Even if they kill me and only my blood remains, it will remain on this land.” The 7,000 residents of the area intend to fight for their right to stay on their land rather than see it turned into a new, illegal Israeli*colony." Ethnic cleansing in East Jerusalem | The Electronic Intifada

That article is 4 years old hahahahaha. WOW !

 

[MHunterB]

Well, as those neighborhoods exist now (predominantly Arab), I wouldn't want them. It's really the Old City that's in contention. The Old City is too small to be divided, and means too much to Jews for that to happen.

I say it's not really up to me as an American - but if the Israelis want to press their claim and there's no prior 'disqualification' due to the treaty signed with Jordan, then I would support them in the attempt. Whatever went on elsewhere doesn't make a historically Jewish neighborhood built on land BOUGHT by Jews well before the Mandate somehow magically be 'Palestinian land'.

LIES is all this is, lies to justify more land thefts by your land thieving pals.

Then what is the truth of the situation? Are you trying to pretend that Jewish individuals didn't buy the land those two nighborhoods stand upon well before the Mandate? Or are you trying to claim the Jordanians didn't force the Jewish residents out at gunpoint?

Do you even know what it is you're asserting is 'lies'?

What do you have to back up your supposition that the article I quoted is not accurate?

 

[MHunterB]

The article is propaganda. I accept events set forth in UN documents. I provided a link to a UN document addressing the events occurring between 1947 to 1949. What I read is first Jewish Forces took over Jerusalem and presumably forced Arabs out, like Arabs in Deir Yasin. Then, the agreement was reached to withdraw from East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Then, perhaps some Jews did leave lands occupied by Jordan, but intl authorities never called this ethnic cleansing and these Jews never requested to be called refugees, from the UN or intl authorities.

The UN is not GOD and its publications are not the Bible: why do you 'worship' the UN (as you would put it)?

What do you offer by way of 'proof' for those claims you made (in the bold)?

I do not see refugee camps for Jews anywhere. I nowhere have read the UN call anything Jordan did ethnic cleansing. The UN is not an Arab organization and they do not disseminate Arab propaganda.

You obviously didn't see the 'tent cities' within Israel in the '40's and '50's which had refugees.....

So, nobody's a 'refugee' unless they're in a 'camp'?

And if the UN didn't label something 'ethnic cleansing' (well, actually they DID label those Jordanian actions exactly that!), then it didn't happen?

The UN has a large and vociferous Arab League bloc within it, and they most certainly HAVE disseminated Arab propaganda (thank for your admission that such a thing exists).

By the way, I am quite certain you are giving the UN far too much 'confidence' in your above words: the degree of FAITH in such a flawed human instrument is touching, but almost entirely misplaced.

 

[toastman]

I say it's not really up to me as an American - but if the Israelis want to press their claim and there's no prior 'disqualification' due to the treaty signed with Jordan, then I would support them in the attempt. Whatever went on elsewhere doesn't make a historically Jewish neighborhood built on land BOUGHT by Jews well before the Mandate somehow magically be 'Palestinian land'.

LIES is all this is, lies to justify more land thefts by your land thieving pals.

Then what is the truth of the situation? Are you trying to pretend that Jewish individuals didn't buy the land those two nighborhoods stand upon well before the Mandate? Or are you trying to claim the Jordanians didn't force the Jewish residents out at gunpoint?

Do you even know what it is you're asserting is 'lies'?

What do you have to back up your supposition that the article I quoted is not accurate?

No, she doesn't. All she does is read the username of the poster, and if it's a pro - Israeli, then she just responds with the same "Zionist Schill" "baby killer" crap ..

 

[ForeverYoung436]

The UN is not GOD and its publications are not the Bible: why do you 'worship' the UN (as you would put it)?

What do you offer by way of 'proof' for those claims you made (in the bold)?

I do not see refugee camps for Jews anywhere. I nowhere have read the UN call anything Jordan did ethnic cleansing. The UN is not an Arab organization and they do not disseminate Arab propaganda.

You obviously didn't see the 'tent cities' within Israel in the '40's and '50's which had refugees.....

So, nobody's a 'refugee' unless they're in a 'camp'?

And if the UN didn't label something 'ethnic cleansing' (well, actually they DID label those Jordanian actions exactly that!), then it didn't happen?

The UN has a large and vociferous Arab League bloc within it, and they most certainly HAVE disseminated Arab propaganda (thank for your admission that such a thing exists).

By the way, I am quite certain you are giving the UN far too much 'confidence' in your above words: the degree of FAITH in such a flawed human instrument is touching, but almost entirely misplaced.

The difference is the Jews didn't STAY refugees, living on U.N. handouts.

 

[MHunterB]

"Denying Israel’s right to its united capital, of course, rests upon the idea that East Jerusalem is some kind of “settlement.” That’s the position the President took when he demanded a halt to Israeli construction in the eastern part of the city, forcing the Palestinians to follow suit and bringing the peace process to a grinding halt. It ignores how Jews have indisputably been the majority in Jerusalem since at least 1853, to saying nothing of the ancient heritage of Jewish Jerusalem. Instead, it picks out the brief period between 1949 to 1967, when Jordan ethnically cleansed East Jerusalem of Jews to interrupt a continuous 1,000-year Jewish presence.



Taking the Palestinian position means installing that atypical 18-year historical blip as the baseline for negotiations. It’s a strange choice even for someone with pretensions toward being even-handed between the victims and perpetrators of ethnic cleansing. It means siding with and rewarding Israel’s Arab enemies, who aimed for exactly this goal when they leveled the Jewish Quarter:


Colonel Abdullah el Tell, local commander of the Jordanian Arab Legion, with whom Mordechai Weingarten negotiated the surrender terms, described the destruction of the Jewish Quarter, in his Memoirs: “The operations of calculated destruction were set in motion. . . . I knew that the Jewish Quarter was densely populated with Jews who caused their fighters a good deal of interference and difficulty. . . . I embarked, therefore, on the shelling of the Quarter with mortars, creating harassment and destruction. . . . Only four days after our entry into Jerusalem the Jewish Quarter had become their graveyard. Death and destruction reigned over it. . . . As the dawn of Friday, May 28, 1948, was about to break, the Jewish Quarter emerged convulsed in a black cloud—a cloud of death and agony. . . .” The Jordanian commander who led the operation is reported to have told his superiors: “For the first time in 1,000 years not a single Jew remains in the Jewish Quarter. Not a single building remains intact. This makes the Jews’ return here impossible.”

The Jordanians then went on to destroy 34 out of the 35 ancient synagogues in the Jewish Quarter and to use them as hen-houses, to desecrate the ancient cemetery on the Mount of Olives and to use the gravestones as latrines, and to deny Jews access to the Western Wall and to turn the courtyard into a garbage dump....."

Obama?s East Jerusalem Stance Rewards 1948 Ethnic Cleansing « Commentary Magazine

So, can someone prove that the quote from Col. el Tell's memoirs is fake? Or that the Col. lied in that section of his memoirs?

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

I do not see refugee camps for Jews anywhere. I nowhere have read the UN call anything Jordan did ethnic cleansing. The UN is not an Arab organization and they do not disseminate Arab propaganda.

You obviously didn't see the 'tent cities' within Israel in the '40's and '50's which had refugees.....

So, nobody's a 'refugee' unless they're in a 'camp'?

And if the UN didn't label something 'ethnic cleansing' (well, actually they DID label those Jordanian actions exactly that!), then it didn't happen?

The UN has a large and vociferous Arab League bloc within it, and they most certainly HAVE disseminated Arab propaganda (thank for your admission that such a thing exists).

By the way, I am quite certain you are giving the UN far too much 'confidence' in your above words: the degree of FAITH in such a flawed human instrument is touching, but almost entirely misplaced.

The difference is the Jews didn't STAY refugees, living on U.N. handouts.

Yes, the Jewish people were assimilated into Israeli society, whereas the Arabs that left are used as pawns and not given rights in the countries they settled in (Lebanon, Syria). Mostly they are living in squalor, not given citizenship, and it furthers the Arab cause in demonizing Israel by treating the Arab refugees like that.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

The UN is not GOD and its publications are not the Bible: why do you 'worship' the UN (as you would put it)?

What do you offer by way of 'proof' for those claims you made (in the bold)?

I do not see refugee camps for Jews anywhere. I nowhere have read the UN call anything Jordan did ethnic cleansing. The UN is not an Arab organization and they do not disseminate Arab propaganda.

You obviously didn't see the 'tent cities' within Israel in the '40's and '50's which had refugees.....

So, nobody's a 'refugee' unless they're in a 'camp'?

And if the UN didn't label something 'ethnic cleansing' (well, actually they DID label those Jordanian actions exactly that!), then it didn't happen?

The UN has a large and vociferous Arab League bloc within it, and they most certainly HAVE disseminated Arab propaganda (thank for your admission that such a thing exists).

By the way, I am quite certain you are giving the UN far too much 'confidence' in your above words: the degree of FAITH in such a flawed human instrument is touching, but almost entirely misplaced.

There was immigration from outside Palestine, so the existence of tents tells us nothing. You produce UN documents discussing ethnic cleansing by Jordan and Jewish refugees resulting and I will believe it happened. For now, I will continue to see all of that as Zionist Mythology. And whatever happened then does not justify present Israeli ethnic cleansing of East Jerusalem.

 

[Hossfly]

It wasn't vacant, it was inhabited according to Mandate and Ottoman census figures. How about arguing facts rather than pro-Israel mythology?

Well then, why did Mark Twain claim the land was empty? And why did Churchill claim that so many Arabs flooded into Palestine during the Mandate period, that Jews would never be able to keep up?

I was not aware either Mark Twain or Churchill were Historians or residents of Palestine.

Does anyone have to be an historian to see what has been going on? Since you are so busy on forums bashing Israel all day long, do you have any idea of the population changes in this country? There were others besides Mark Twain who also observed what he saw, and don't forget that Mark Twain was a journalist and no doubt paid close attention to what he observed. As for Churchill, have you ever thought that the British officials in the area reported back to him what was going on?

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

You obviously didn't see the 'tent cities' within Israel in the '40's and '50's which had refugees.....

So, nobody's a 'refugee' unless they're in a 'camp'?

And if the UN didn't label something 'ethnic cleansing' (well, actually they DID label those Jordanian actions exactly that!), then it didn't happen?

The UN has a large and vociferous Arab League bloc within it, and they most certainly HAVE disseminated Arab propaganda (thank for your admission that such a thing exists).

By the way, I am quite certain you are giving the UN far too much 'confidence' in your above words: the degree of FAITH in such a flawed human instrument is touching, but almost entirely misplaced.

The difference is the Jews didn't STAY refugees, living on U.N. handouts.

Yes, the Jewish people were assimilated into Israeli society, whereas the Arabs that left are used as pawns and not given rights in the countries they settled in (Lebanon, Syria). Mostly they are living in squalor, not given citizenship, and it furthers the Arab cause in demonizing Israel by treating the Arab refugees like that.

Under intl law, all of those Palestinian refugees have a clear legal right to return. Why does Israel not abide by intl law and allow them to return?

 

[MHunterB]

So the spread in LIFE Magazine wasn't good enough - why not, Sherri? Are you going to claim their correspondent didn't know what he was seeing, and photographing?

How can you reject something as public as the LIFE article, which IS a 'primary source'? That is counter to the protocols for historians: do you think those should be set aside? WHY?

 

[Hossfly]

The difference is the Jews didn't STAY refugees, living on U.N. handouts.

Yes, the Jewish people were assimilated into Israeli society, whereas the Arabs that left are used as pawns and not given rights in the countries they settled in (Lebanon, Syria). Mostly they are living in squalor, not given citizenship, and it furthers the Arab cause in demonizing Israel by treating the Arab refugees like that.

Under intl law, all of those Palestinian refugees have a clear legal right to return. Why does Israel not abide by intl law and allow them to return?

Maybe it's because Israel runs things in that neck of the woods.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Well then, why did Mark Twain claim the land was empty? And why did Churchill claim that so many Arabs flooded into Palestine during the Mandate period, that Jews would never be able to keep up?

I was not aware either Mark Twain or Churchill were Historians or residents of Palestine.

Does anyone have to be an historian to see what has been going on? Since you are so busy on forums bashing Israel all day long, do you have any idea of the population changes in this country? There were others besides Mark Twain who also observed what he saw, and don't forget that Mark Twain was a journalist and no doubt paid close attention to what he observed. As for Churchill, have you ever thought that the British officials in the area reported back to him what was going on?

I already produced UN documents proving the land was never vacant, proving Mark Twain was a liar. As for Churhhill, who can expect truth from a war criminal like him? And the UN documents dont document what he claimed to be true, either. They document Jewish immigration.

 

[MHunterB]

The difference is the Jews didn't STAY refugees, living on U.N. handouts.

Yes, the Jewish people were assimilated into Israeli society, whereas the Arabs that left are used as pawns and not given rights in the countries they settled in (Lebanon, Syria). Mostly they are living in squalor, not given citizenship, and it furthers the Arab cause in demonizing Israel by treating the Arab refugees like that.

Under intl law, all of those Palestinian refugees have a clear legal right to return. Why does Israel not abide by intl law and allow them to return?

On this thread we were discussing the removal of Jews from 'East Jerusalem' by the Jordanians, and the subsequent farce of pretending that their neighborhoods never existed as Jewish PRE-MANDATE settlements.

I want to know why the Palestinans who didn't own the land nor live there before '49 should be 'allowed to return' to what wasn't theirs ?

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

So the spread in LIFE Magazine wasn't good enough - why not, Sherri? Are you going to claim their correspondent didn't know what he was seeing, and photographing?

How can you reject something as public as the LIFE article, which IS a 'primary source'? That is counter to the protocols for historians: do you think those should be set aside? WHY?

They dont even call it ethnic cleansing, so your source does not even support your claim. And another point, if some Arabs moved where some Jews once had been in East Jerusalem it was because they were kicked out of Israel themselves. If Israel kicks them out of their home again, why are they not allowed to return to their original homes inside Israel?

 

[Hossfly]

I was not aware either Mark Twain or Churchill were Historians or residents of Palestine.

Does anyone have to be an historian to see what has been going on? Since you are so busy on forums bashing Israel all day long, do you have any idea of the population changes in this country? There were others besides Mark Twain who also observed what he saw, and don't forget that Mark Twain was a journalist and no doubt paid close attention to what he observed. As for Churchill, have you ever thought that the British officials in the area reported back to him what was going on?

I already produced UN documents proving the land was never vacant, proving Mark Twain was a liar. As for Churhhill, who can expect truth from a war criminal like him? And the UN documents dont document what he claimed to be true, either. They document Jewish immigration.

You have to be kidding, Frau Sherri. Or else you're a flat Earther.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Yes, the Jewish people were assimilated into Israeli society, whereas the Arabs that left are used as pawns and not given rights in the countries they settled in (Lebanon, Syria). Mostly they are living in squalor, not given citizenship, and it furthers the Arab cause in demonizing Israel by treating the Arab refugees like that.

Under intl law, all of those Palestinian refugees have a clear legal right to return. Why does Israel not abide by intl law and allow them to return?

On this thread we were discussing the removal of Jews from 'East Jerusalem' by the Jordanians, and the subsequent farce of pretending that their neighborhoods never existed as Jewish PRE-MANDATE settlements.

I want to know why the Palestinans who didn't own the land nor live there before '49 should be 'allowed to return' to what wasn't theirs ?

That is not what the OP is about. Stop lying. And about Jerusalem Pre Partition Plan, there were 100000 Jews and 100000 Arabs there. Half of the population was Arab, but today in what is now East Jerusalem over half of the population is now Jewish and it is all because of Israels continuing ethnic cleansing in Jerusalem.

 

[MHunterB]

So the spread in LIFE Magazine wasn't good enough - why not, Sherri? Are you going to claim their correspondent didn't know what he was seeing, and photographing?

How can you reject something as public as the LIFE article, which IS a 'primary source'? That is counter to the protocols for historians: do you think those should be set aside? WHY?

They dont even call it ethnic cleansing, so your source does not even support your claim. And another point, if some Arabs moved where some Jews once had been in East Jerusalem it was because they were kicked out of Israel themselves. If Israel kicks them out of their home again, why are they not allowed to return to their original homes inside Israel?

Please do stop being so willfully ignorant: Just because the word 'ethnic cleansing' wasn't used by the Babylonians to refer to dragging the Jews out to Babylonia - then the Jews weren't taken out of Israel then?

The neighborhoods in EJ where 'some Jews had once been' were emptied at gunpoint by Arab soldiers because the residents were Jewish and for no other reason. That is what 'ethnic cleansing' is all about. And it's what the memoirs of that Jordanian Col. make very clear was quite deliberately to eradicate Jewish presence.

Now, how does an Arab moving IN there have any connection to whether they'd been 'forced' out of somewhere else? It does not: there may or may not be a connection. Logically, that's not enough information to decide.

Maybe you should read this for a better picture of what actually went on: it's filled with lots of citations from Palestinians and other Arabs.

Our Jerusalem.com -