Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[Shusha]

OK, but by 1948 that was only about 7% of Palestine.

And only about 5% of land in Palestine was Arab mulk land (privately owned).

The problem is not the small percentages of land which was privately owned. The problem is what to do with the concept of miri land -- land which is not privately purchased and owned, per se, but belongs to the State and is leased under certain conditions in perpetuity. The land isn't owned, but the right to the fruits of the land and the continued right of cultivation is owned. The principle behind it is that land which land which can be cultivated, but currently isn't being cultivated, can be taken up by anyone who wants to cultivate it and by paying tithe and taxes, the rights to the cultivation become owned.

Its a useful system when there are vast tracts of land which can be cultivated and aren't being utilized. It encourages growth and provides additional taxes for the Government. But its a shitty system when land becomes scarce or when there disputes over territory.

The really nasty problem for Team Palestine is that the underlying concept is that if you cultivate or use the land -- you own it. Which means, under Ottoman law (you know, the law that the "occupying power" is required to follow) anyone who uses or cultivates the land becomes the owner. So settlements are actually, in reality, legitimized by Ottoman law.

 

[Hossfly]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You crack me up.

I noticed that the Arab Palestinians lost the Civil War

What civil war?
The one where the foreign colonists attacked the natives?

(COMMENT)

Well, the two factions of the Citizens of the Territory; both under the Palestine Citizenship Oder.

Most Respectfully,
R

Do you mean the order that was imposed on the Palestinians at the point of a gun?

What was imposed on the Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese absentee landowners? They sold large tracts of land to Jewish buyers.

You whine and moan about the history you want to re-write.

Hamas is hiring. Get a job.

What I don't understand, Hollie, is all this constant talk about the indigenous Palestinians. Imagine if you have only been in an area for two years, you can be considered a refugee. Maybe all the Central Americans and Mexicans who have only been here for two years can be considered a refugee and get all the benefits. After all, they are coming here for the same reason the Arabs moved into Palestine -- to participate in the economic growth promoted by our country and for employment opportunities.

'Who Are the Refugees?

The number of Arabs in Palestine, and particularly in Jewish areas, was increased by the attraction of economic growth promoted by Zionist investment, and later by employment opportunities afforded by the British due to WW II. Until 1938, the British did not regulate immigration from Jordan at all, and did not record it. Anyone who had been in Palestine for at least two years prior to the war, was considered a refugee."

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore,
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/opinion/who-are-the-real-heirs-of-zionism.html?_r=0
"Zionism" was not invented. In this discussion group, there are pro-Zionist and anti-Zionist. It is an evolving, but fading philosophy, first brought forward by Nathan Birnbaum (≈ 1890). Zionism alla Birnbaum was somewhat ideologically different from the "Zionism" which Theodor Herzl would come to promote. And we can see the gradual evolutionary processes in Zionism even today; including the politicalization of "Zionism." Herzl moved "Zionism" to the next level in the mid-1890s, with the establishment of the World Zionist Organization (WZO), a funding stream and the practical application of "zionism." With the next major leap for "zionism" was the moving to Jewish Corporate based system. Since the declaration of Israel, "zionism" went through an evolutionary change yet again -- although it almost went unnoticed. More enlightened then before the adoption of the Partition Plan, the "Zionist" component of Jewish national development became focused on issue of peace and security --- with the emphasis of a Defense Force and government that was more secular in nature.

So what was the problem prior to the invention of Zionism in 1875 and the settler/colonialism prior to 1925 by arab muslims.

(COMMENT)

Yes, --- it must be understood that within the Jewish Community in both Europe and Palestine, with a major trigger in 1933 onward (the party inspired boycott of business, academic/scientific involvement, and professional practices), from which the Palestinians and Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) mimic from a page in the NAZI Playbook --- was not of one mind. There was a diversity in views as to what was happening, what was meant, and what to do about it. "Zionism" between 1933 and 1939, was not of a single mind, and would become much more concerned with the escape and evasion form the "Holocaust." It was more about survival than about the politics of the time. Zionism and the WZO would not become cohesive and symbiotic until the post-war era (a reconstruction period). There was a very interesting New York Times piece (Who Are the True Heirs of Zionism? By STEVEN ERLANGERFEB. 4, 2016) which talks of about the difference the different facets of "Zionism."

"Zionism" is the process, yet again, in making another leap in its evolution. We are not sure what the "New Zionist" are going to become; but it seems to focus on Peace and Security. Whatever you think the "Zionist" were --- or --- whatever you might think the "Zionist" are, I'm willing to bet they will become something different yet again.

Most Respectfully,
R

JERUSALEM — ZIONISM was never the gentlest of ideologies. The return of the Jewish people to their biblical homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty there have always carried within them the displacement of those already living on the land.

The Israeli general and politician Yigal Allon defined Zionism in 1975 as “the national liberation movement of a people exiled from its historic homeland and dispersed among the nations of the world.” Some years later, and more crudely, perhaps, another general and politician, Rehavam Ze’evi, a tough right-winger, said, “Zionism is in essence the Zionism of transfer,” adding, “If transfer is immoral, then all of Zionism is immoral.”​

BTW, transfer is a euphemism for kicking people out of their homes and stealing their land.

Of course that is the I/P conflict in a nutshell.

Correct as the evidence proves the arab muslims are good at kicking people out of their homes and stealing their land. Over 1 million Jews were so treated in 1949 when the UN stepped in and stopped the Israelis from finishing the Job the arab muslims started

Two separate and unrelated issues.

BULLSHIT it is the arab muslims that kick people out for nothing, not the Jews. The arab muslims have it within their power to bring a halt to all violence and terrorism and refuse to do so.

The issue's are related, it is just that the Jews are once again having international law support them and you dont like it.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore,
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/opinion/who-are-the-real-heirs-of-zionism.html?_r=0
"Zionism" was not invented. In this discussion group, there are pro-Zionist and anti-Zionist. It is an evolving, but fading philosophy, first brought forward by Nathan Birnbaum (≈ 1890). Zionism alla Birnbaum was somewhat ideologically different from the "Zionism" which Theodor Herzl would come to promote. And we can see the gradual evolutionary processes in Zionism even today; including the politicalization of "Zionism." Herzl moved "Zionism" to the next level in the mid-1890s, with the establishment of the World Zionist Organization (WZO), a funding stream and the practical application of "zionism." With the next major leap for "zionism" was the moving to Jewish Corporate based system. Since the declaration of Israel, "zionism" went through an evolutionary change yet again -- although it almost went unnoticed. More enlightened then before the adoption of the Partition Plan, the "Zionist" component of Jewish national development became focused on issue of peace and security --- with the emphasis of a Defense Force and government that was more secular in nature.

So what was the problem prior to the invention of Zionism in 1875 and the settler/colonialism prior to 1925 by arab muslims.

(COMMENT)

Yes, --- it must be understood that within the Jewish Community in both Europe and Palestine, with a major trigger in 1933 onward (the party inspired boycott of business, academic/scientific involvement, and professional practices), from which the Palestinians and Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) mimic from a page in the NAZI Playbook --- was not of one mind. There was a diversity in views as to what was happening, what was meant, and what to do about it. "Zionism" between 1933 and 1939, was not of a single mind, and would become much more concerned with the escape and evasion form the "Holocaust." It was more about survival than about the politics of the time. Zionism and the WZO would not become cohesive and symbiotic until the post-war era (a reconstruction period). There was a very interesting New York Times piece (Who Are the True Heirs of Zionism? By STEVEN ERLANGERFEB. 4, 2016) which talks of about the difference the different facets of "Zionism."

"Zionism" is the process, yet again, in making another leap in its evolution. We are not sure what the "New Zionist" are going to become; but it seems to focus on Peace and Security. Whatever you think the "Zionist" were --- or --- whatever you might think the "Zionist" are, I'm willing to bet they will become something different yet again.

Most Respectfully,
R

JERUSALEM — ZIONISM was never the gentlest of ideologies. The return of the Jewish people to their biblical homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty there have always carried within them the displacement of those already living on the land.

The Israeli general and politician Yigal Allon defined Zionism in 1975 as “the national liberation movement of a people exiled from its historic homeland and dispersed among the nations of the world.” Some years later, and more crudely, perhaps, another general and politician, Rehavam Ze’evi, a tough right-winger, said, “Zionism is in essence the Zionism of transfer,” adding, “If transfer is immoral, then all of Zionism is immoral.”​

BTW, transfer is a euphemism for kicking people out of their homes and stealing their land.

Of course that is the I/P conflict in a nutshell.

Nonsense. We know from the Ottoman land records that the major land owners were absentee owners in Egypt, Syria and Lebanon. The Zionists™ didn't kick them out of their homes in foreign lands.

We know from the Ottoman land records that the major, absentee land owners sold large tracts of land to Jewish buyers.

Your claims of people being kicked out of their homes and their land stolen, are, in a nut shell, utterly bogus.

No, you don't "know that from Ottoman land records". You are lying, as usual. The Ottoman land records and ownership changes during the Mandate were used to produce this map.

LIAR as this was drawn by a committee before the UN was even invented, and was based on false information

 

[Phoenall]

I noticed that the Arab Palestinians lost the Civil War

What civil war?

The one where the foreign colonists attacked the natives?

Thats the one, when arab muslims from Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Yemen and Saudi attacked the palestinian Jews

 

[Phoenall]

I noticed that the Arab Palestinians lost the Civil War

What civil war?

The one where the foreign colonists attacked the natives?

You've fallen down and bumped your head again, right?

Hollie has never quite understood that the Zionists came from Europe, a different continent.

Just like the Catholic Christians then went to palestine, South America and parts of Europe.

Monte does not understand that most Zionists are not Jewish, and so did not migrate when invited to do so by the LoN

 

[Phoenall]

The owners were Palestinian, as confirmed by the UN. Stop making things up.

Then why haven't you produced an official UN document, and not the anti semitic rubbish you try and palm of as being from the UN

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You crack me up.

I noticed that the Arab Palestinians lost the Civil War

What civil war?
The one where the foreign colonists attacked the natives?

(COMMENT)

Well, the two factions of the Citizens of the Territory; both under the Palestine Citizenship Oder.

Most Respectfully,
R

Do you mean the order that was imposed on the Palestinians at the point of a gun?

Was it indeed, they did not have to comply with it they could have done nothing and lost all chances of getting something out of it. Hold on that is exactly what they did do and have lost it all as a result. It was never imposed on them at the point of a gun, this is just one of your many LIES that you have failed to prove

 

[Phoenall]

Still making things up. No facts just propaganda.

Projection again

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You crack me up.

I noticed that the Arab Palestinians lost the Civil War

What civil war?
The one where the foreign colonists attacked the natives?

(COMMENT)

Well, the two factions of the Citizens of the Territory; both under the Palestine Citizenship Oder.

Most Respectfully,
R

Do you mean the order that was imposed on the Palestinians at the point of a gun?

What was imposed on the Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese absentee landowners? They sold large tracts of land to Jewish buyers.

You whine and moan about the history you want to re-write.

Hamas is hiring. Get a job.

OK, but by 1948 that was only about 7% of Palestine.

AND what rights did they have after they were in receipt of their own homelands, they could not be dual, triple or quad nationalities

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore,
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/opinion/who-are-the-real-heirs-of-zionism.html?_r=0
"Zionism" was not invented. In this discussion group, there are pro-Zionist and anti-Zionist. It is an evolving, but fading philosophy, first brought forward by Nathan Birnbaum (≈ 1890). Zionism alla Birnbaum was somewhat ideologically different from the "Zionism" which Theodor Herzl would come to promote. And we can see the gradual evolutionary processes in Zionism even today; including the politicalization of "Zionism." Herzl moved "Zionism" to the next level in the mid-1890s, with the establishment of the World Zionist Organization (WZO), a funding stream and the practical application of "zionism." With the next major leap for "zionism" was the moving to Jewish Corporate based system. Since the declaration of Israel, "zionism" went through an evolutionary change yet again -- although it almost went unnoticed. More enlightened then before the adoption of the Partition Plan, the "Zionist" component of Jewish national development became focused on issue of peace and security --- with the emphasis of a Defense Force and government that was more secular in nature.

So what was the problem prior to the invention of Zionism in 1875 and the settler/colonialism prior to 1925 by arab muslims.

(COMMENT)

Yes, --- it must be understood that within the Jewish Community in both Europe and Palestine, with a major trigger in 1933 onward (the party inspired boycott of business, academic/scientific involvement, and professional practices), from which the Palestinians and Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) mimic from a page in the NAZI Playbook --- was not of one mind. There was a diversity in views as to what was happening, what was meant, and what to do about it. "Zionism" between 1933 and 1939, was not of a single mind, and would become much more concerned with the escape and evasion form the "Holocaust." It was more about survival than about the politics of the time. Zionism and the WZO would not become cohesive and symbiotic until the post-war era (a reconstruction period). There was a very interesting New York Times piece (Who Are the True Heirs of Zionism? By STEVEN ERLANGERFEB. 4, 2016) which talks of about the difference the different facets of "Zionism."

"Zionism" is the process, yet again, in making another leap in its evolution. We are not sure what the "New Zionist" are going to become; but it seems to focus on Peace and Security. Whatever you think the "Zionist" were --- or --- whatever you might think the "Zionist" are, I'm willing to bet they will become something different yet again.

Most Respectfully,
R

JERUSALEM — ZIONISM was never the gentlest of ideologies. The return of the Jewish people to their biblical homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty there have always carried within them the displacement of those already living on the land.

The Israeli general and politician Yigal Allon defined Zionism in 1975 as “the national liberation movement of a people exiled from its historic homeland and dispersed among the nations of the world.” Some years later, and more crudely, perhaps, another general and politician, Rehavam Ze’evi, a tough right-winger, said, “Zionism is in essence the Zionism of transfer,” adding, “If transfer is immoral, then all of Zionism is immoral.”​

BTW, transfer is a euphemism for kicking people out of their homes and stealing their land.

Of course that is the I/P conflict in a nutshell.

Correct as the evidence proves the arab muslims are good at kicking people out of their homes and stealing their land. Over 1 million Jews were so treated in 1949 when the UN stepped in and stopped the Israelis from finishing the Job the arab muslims started

Two separate and unrelated issues.

BULLSHIT it is the arab muslims that kick people out for nothing, not the Jews. The arab muslims have it within their power to bring a halt to all violence and terrorism and refuse to do so.

The issue's are related, it is just that the Jews are once again having international law support them and you dont like it.

Of course you have never been able to elaborate on that assertion.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore,
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/opinion/who-are-the-real-heirs-of-zionism.html?_r=0
"Zionism" was not invented. In this discussion group, there are pro-Zionist and anti-Zionist. It is an evolving, but fading philosophy, first brought forward by Nathan Birnbaum (≈ 1890). Zionism alla Birnbaum was somewhat ideologically different from the "Zionism" which Theodor Herzl would come to promote. And we can see the gradual evolutionary processes in Zionism even today; including the politicalization of "Zionism." Herzl moved "Zionism" to the next level in the mid-1890s, with the establishment of the World Zionist Organization (WZO), a funding stream and the practical application of "zionism." With the next major leap for "zionism" was the moving to Jewish Corporate based system. Since the declaration of Israel, "zionism" went through an evolutionary change yet again -- although it almost went unnoticed. More enlightened then before the adoption of the Partition Plan, the "Zionist" component of Jewish national development became focused on issue of peace and security --- with the emphasis of a Defense Force and government that was more secular in nature.

(COMMENT)

Yes, --- it must be understood that within the Jewish Community in both Europe and Palestine, with a major trigger in 1933 onward (the party inspired boycott of business, academic/scientific involvement, and professional practices), from which the Palestinians and Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) mimic from a page in the NAZI Playbook --- was not of one mind. There was a diversity in views as to what was happening, what was meant, and what to do about it. "Zionism" between 1933 and 1939, was not of a single mind, and would become much more concerned with the escape and evasion form the "Holocaust." It was more about survival than about the politics of the time. Zionism and the WZO would not become cohesive and symbiotic until the post-war era (a reconstruction period). There was a very interesting New York Times piece (Who Are the True Heirs of Zionism? By STEVEN ERLANGERFEB. 4, 2016) which talks of about the difference the different facets of "Zionism."

"Zionism" is the process, yet again, in making another leap in its evolution. We are not sure what the "New Zionist" are going to become; but it seems to focus on Peace and Security. Whatever you think the "Zionist" were --- or --- whatever you might think the "Zionist" are, I'm willing to bet they will become something different yet again.

Most Respectfully,
R

JERUSALEM — ZIONISM was never the gentlest of ideologies. The return of the Jewish people to their biblical homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty there have always carried within them the displacement of those already living on the land.

The Israeli general and politician Yigal Allon defined Zionism in 1975 as “the national liberation movement of a people exiled from its historic homeland and dispersed among the nations of the world.” Some years later, and more crudely, perhaps, another general and politician, Rehavam Ze’evi, a tough right-winger, said, “Zionism is in essence the Zionism of transfer,” adding, “If transfer is immoral, then all of Zionism is immoral.”​

BTW, transfer is a euphemism for kicking people out of their homes and stealing their land.

Of course that is the I/P conflict in a nutshell.

Correct as the evidence proves the arab muslims are good at kicking people out of their homes and stealing their land. Over 1 million Jews were so treated in 1949 when the UN stepped in and stopped the Israelis from finishing the Job the arab muslims started

Two separate and unrelated issues.

BULLSHIT it is the arab muslims that kick people out for nothing, not the Jews. The arab muslims have it within their power to bring a halt to all violence and terrorism and refuse to do so.

The issue's are related, it is just that the Jews are once again having international law support them and you dont like it.

Of course you have never been able to elaborate on that assertion.

It is done all the time, and you just switch of and ignore what was written. Then demand the same link a few posts later because you want the answer you expected and did not get.

 

[P F Tinmore]

JERUSALEM — ZIONISM was never the gentlest of ideologies. The return of the Jewish people to their biblical homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty there have always carried within them the displacement of those already living on the land.

The Israeli general and politician Yigal Allon defined Zionism in 1975 as “the national liberation movement of a people exiled from its historic homeland and dispersed among the nations of the world.” Some years later, and more crudely, perhaps, another general and politician, Rehavam Ze’evi, a tough right-winger, said, “Zionism is in essence the Zionism of transfer,” adding, “If transfer is immoral, then all of Zionism is immoral.”​

BTW, transfer is a euphemism for kicking people out of their homes and stealing their land.

Of course that is the I/P conflict in a nutshell.

Correct as the evidence proves the arab muslims are good at kicking people out of their homes and stealing their land. Over 1 million Jews were so treated in 1949 when the UN stepped in and stopped the Israelis from finishing the Job the arab muslims started

Two separate and unrelated issues.

BULLSHIT it is the arab muslims that kick people out for nothing, not the Jews. The arab muslims have it within their power to bring a halt to all violence and terrorism and refuse to do so.

The issue's are related, it is just that the Jews are once again having international law support them and you dont like it.

Of course you have never been able to elaborate on that assertion.

It is done all the time, and you just switch of and ignore what was written. Then demand the same link a few posts later because you want the answer you expected and did not get.

Same old duck.

 

[Phoenall]

Correct as the evidence proves the arab muslims are good at kicking people out of their homes and stealing their land. Over 1 million Jews were so treated in 1949 when the UN stepped in and stopped the Israelis from finishing the Job the arab muslims started

Two separate and unrelated issues.

BULLSHIT it is the arab muslims that kick people out for nothing, not the Jews. The arab muslims have it within their power to bring a halt to all violence and terrorism and refuse to do so.

The issue's are related, it is just that the Jews are once again having international law support them and you dont like it.

Of course you have never been able to elaborate on that assertion.

It is done all the time, and you just switch of and ignore what was written. Then demand the same link a few posts later because you want the answer you expected and did not get.

Same old duck.

No a fact shown by the number of times you ask for the same link because you are not getting the answers you want. Most members are commenting on your inability to take in simple concepts and use them.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Who are the Palestinians?

Majd Al-Masharawy

 

[Hollie]

Who are the are the Arab-Moslem terrorists?

 

[montelatici]

Who are the Israeli-Jewish terrorists?

 

[Phoenall]

Who are the Israeli-Jewish terrorists?

Yes who indeed when yiou look at the evidence you find the homes were actually Jewish stolen by the arab muslims. Now the Jews are reclaiming them

 

[P F Tinmore]

Who are the Palestinians?

15-year-old Ahed Tamimi denied visa by State Dept for US speaking tour

Ahed Tamimi was slated to be part of the No Child Behind Bars/Living Resistance speaking tour that is to tour the US beginning on January 15, 2017, but according to an email sent out yesterday by the Friends of Sabeel North America (FOSNA), she has been denied a visa to enter the country.

But the tour, it seems, will proceed anyway, and even though Ahed will not be here physically, plans nonetheless are being made to link her to US audiences via live-stream video,

- See more at: 15-year-old Ahed Tamimi denied visa by State Dept for US speaking tour

 

[Hollie]

Who are the Palestinians?

15-year-old Ahed Tamimi denied visa by State Dept for US speaking tour

Ahed Tamimi was slated to be part of the No Child Behind Bars/Living Resistance speaking tour that is to tour the US beginning on January 15, 2017, but according to an email sent out yesterday by the Friends of Sabeel North America (FOSNA), she has been denied a visa to enter the country.

But the tour, it seems, will proceed anyway, and even though Ahed will not be here physically, plans nonetheless are being made to link her to US audiences via live-stream video,

- See more at: 15-year-old Ahed Tamimi denied visa by State Dept for US speaking tour

Oh, what a shame. Shirley Temper was denied a stop on the Islamic terrorist propaganda tour.

Chuckle.