Quote:
No that is the truth.
Play nicely .....so a simple question , is there a new definition of truth in Gawains world ?Quote:
No its simply the truth.
Printable View
Quote:
No that is the truth.
Play nicely .....so a simple question , is there a new definition of truth in Gawains world ?Quote:
No its simply the truth.
Tribesy:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
You've heard Gawain on this point before. Gawain has always maintained that there were no "Palestinians" prior to the 1948 conflict. He has consistently asserted that they were and are ethnic Arabs who happen to be living in a particular region and has suggested that, prior to 1948, they themselves did not think of/label themselves as Palestinian. You are, of course, free to believe that Gawain is incorrect, but his perspective on this has been pretty clear and consistent.
It also makes a certain amount of sense, since the partition of Arabia was arbitary, look at Iraq.
However, I think he is wrong. If anything the Jordanians are the "new" ones.
Oh, and you can tell the difference Gawain, they wear different shemaghs (head cloths).
Different, tribes, you see.
You've heard Gawain on this point before.
Yep and hear it again now .
Gawain has always maintained that there were no "Palestinians" prior to the 1948 conflict. He has consistently asserted that they were and are ethnic Arabs who happen to be living in a particular region and has suggested that, prior to 1948, they themselves did not think of/label themselves as Palestinian. You are, of course, free to believe that Gawain is incorrect, but his perspective on this has been pretty clear and consistent.
But that isn't what he said is it .
Jordan was not the "palestinian" state and not only were the people who (with military assistance to keep the locals in order) were given rule of that piece of territory not from there , they had no claim to that territory either .Quote:
The "Palestinians" already had their own state and it was called Jordan
They were claiming another piece of territory , which they were also not from .
The original partition didn't have arab Palestine and Jewish Palestine did it , and the only documentary evidence Gawain will be able to produce that "supports" that claim is a rather shoddy attempt from a revisionist website where they have taken a very widely published map of the partition and changed the names on it .(you would have thought they could have at leastmade an effort to change the colour scheme so it was less obvious which map they had chosen to alter)Quote:
Yes when they made the second partion and decided to name the westbank Palestine. The orignal partion had Arab Palestine(Jordan) and Jewish Palestine (Israel)
but his perspective on this has been pretty clear and consistent.
Yes consistantly wrong , unless of course someone wants to write to the Knesset and tell them that their version of their history on their website is wrong , and Gawain is correct .
A wee bit off-topic but never the less relevant.
This map by T.E Lawrence is quite different from the way the Middle-east ulitimately was partitioned. The most notable difference being that Syria and Arabia is one state.
Also note that Palestine is a state.
Ofcourse this didn't work 'cause the French also wanted a piece of the pie and got Syria.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...nce_map800.jpg
Interesting map Randarkmaan
Compare it with the SykesPiccot ones where palestine is the "allied condominium " , then compare both with those produced for the Mcmahon/Hussein agreement (though of course they were not produced as part of the agreement ,they were produced as what different people thought the vague borders of that agreement were) .
Finally compare with with the mandated borders and the amended mandate borders .
Its really a very interesting subject .
Further to Seamus (and Gawain) from that last post .
A leading Israeli newspaper is banning certain words and phrases from inclusion in discussions about Israel/Palestine , that phrase that Gawain is fond of throwing around (and any similar derivative ) is one of those banned, since it is meaningless and serves no purpose in any rational debate .:2thumbsup:Quote:
Gawain has always maintained that there were no "Palestinians" prior to the 1948 conflict.
Now , a leading Israeli scholar also has some rather choice words about the use of that particular phrase , but I think repeating them may just ever so slightly break forum rules .:laugh4:
Australian War Memorials list countries where soldiers fought.
In 1917 it wasn't called Israel, it was called Palestine.
"In October 1917 the Australian War Records Section assigned Hurley to document the Australian experience in Palestine. He arrived during a quiet period. The famous charge at Beersheba and the fight for Gaza had already occurred, while the war-winning offensive against the Turks in September 1918 lay ahead. "
"Attack on Beersheba
Beersheba, a heavily fortified town 43 km from the Turkish bastion of Gaza, was the scene of an historic charge by the 4th Light Horse Brigade on 31 October 1917. Beersheba anchored the right end of a defensive line that stretched all the way from Gaza on the Mediterranean coast. After two failed attempts to attack Gaza frontally it was decided to outflank it by turning the Turkish line around Beersheba. The attack was launched at dawn on 31 October but by late afternoon the British 20 Corps had made little headway toward the town and its vital wells. Lieutenant General Harry Chauvel, commanding the Desert Mounted Corps, thus ordered the 4th Light Horse Brigade forward to attempt to secure the position. Brigadier William Grant responded by ordering light horseman of the 4th and 12th Regiments to charge at the unwired Turkish trenches. Employing their bayonets as "swords" the momentum of the surprise attack carried them through the Turkish defences. The water supplies were saved and over 1,000 Turkish prisoners were taken. The fall of Beersheba thus opened the way for a general outflanking of the Gaza-Beersheba Line. After severe fighting Turkish forces abandoned Gaza on 6 November and began their withdrawal into Palestine."
Yes but just because it was called palestine it doesn't mean that people who lived there were Palestinians .Quote:
In 1917 it wasn't called Israel, it was called Palestine.
They were just people living in a province that was known to some as Palestine .
Actual real honest to goodness Palestinians came much later , 4 whole years later in fact when someone drew up a paper defining citizenship of somewhere called Palestine , then they became Palestinians .
Which is just ever so slightly earlier than the 1948 that Seamus wrongly attributes to Gawain , and a hell of a lot earlier than 1967 which Gawain normally insists is when they were invented by Arafat .
They arer not the people we refer to as Palestinians today. Or in 1948. Your speaking of the first ideas of Palestine becoming a nation. There was no real government and Palestinians certainly were not a peoples at this time. The common usage of the word "Palestinian" refers people who live in Palestine: Arabs (a "mixed race of Arabic speaking peoples"), Bedouins, Christians and Jews.Quote:
Which is just ever so slightly earlier than the 1948 that Seamus wrongly attributes to Gawain , and a hell of a lot earlier than 1967 which Gawain normally insists is when they were invented by Arafat .
Quote:
History did not begin with the Arab conquest in the seventh century. The people whose nation was destroyed by the Romans were the Jews. There were no Arab Palestinians then -- not until seven hundred years later would an Arab rule prevail, and then briefly. And not by people known as "Palestinians." The short Arab rule would be reigning over Christians and Jews, who had been there to languish under various other foreign conquerors, -- Roman, Byzantine, Persian, to name just three in the centuries between the Roman and Arab conquests. The peoples who conquered under the banner of the invading Arabians from the desert were often hired mercenaries who remained on the land as soldiers -- not Arabians, but others who were enticed by the promise of the booty of conquest.
From the time the Arabians, along with their non-Arabian recruits, entered Palestine and Syria, they found and themselves added to what was "ethnologically a chaos of all the possible human combinations to which, when Palestine became a land of pilgrimage, a new admixture was added."1 Among the peoples who have been counted as "indigenous Palestinian Arabs" are Balkans, Greeks, Syrians, Latins, Egyptians, Turks, Armenians, Italians, Persians, Kurds, Germans, Afghans, Circassians, Bosnians, Sudanese, Samaritans, Algerians, Motawila, and Tartars.
John of Wurzburg lists for the middle era of the kingdom, Latins, Germans, Hungarians, Scots, Navarese, Bretons, English, Franks, Ruthenians, Bohemians, Greeks, Bulgarians, Georgians, Armenians, Syrians, Persian Nestorians, Indians,Egyptians, Copts, Maronites and natives from the Nile Delta. The list might be much extended, for it was the period of the great self-willed city-states in Europe, and Amalfi, Pisans, Genoese, Venetians, and Marseillais, who had quarters in all the bigger cities, owned villages, and had trading rights, would, in all probability, have submitted to any of the above designations, only under pressure. Besides all these, Norsemen, Danes, Frisians, Tartars, Jews, Arabs, Russians, Nubians, and Samaritans, can be safely added to the greatest human agglomeration drawn together in one small area of the globe."2
Greeks fled the Muslim rule in Greece, and landed in Palestine. By the mid-seventeenth century, the Greeks lived everywhere in the Holy Land--constituting about twenty percent of the population-and their authority dominated the villages.3
Between 1750 and 1766 Jaffa had been rebuilt, and had some five hundred houses. Turks, Arabs, Greeks and Armenians and a solitary Latin monk lived there, to attend to the wants of the thousands of pilgrims who had to be temporarily housed in the port before proceeding to Jerusalem.4
"In some cases villages [in Palestine] are populated wholly by settlers from other portions of the Turkish Empire within the nineteenth century. There are villages of Bosnians, Druzes, Circassians and Egyptians," one historian has reported. 5
Another source, the Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1911 edition (before the "more chauvinist Arab history" began to prevail with the encouragement of the British), finds the "population" of Palestine composed of so "widely differing" a group of "inhabitants" -- whose "ethnological affinities" create "early in the 20th century a list of no less than fifty languages" (see below) -- that "it is therefore no easy task to write concisely ... on the ethnology of Palestine." In addition to the "Assyrian, Persian and Roman" elements of ancient times, "the short-lived Egyptian government introduced into the population an element from that country which still persists in the villages."
. . . There are very large contingents from the Mediterranean countries, especially Armenia, Greece and Italy . . . Turkoman settlements ... a number of Persians and a fairly large Afghan colony . . . Motawila ... long settled immigrants from Persia ... tribes of Kurds ... German "Templar" colonies ... a Bosnian colony ... and the Circassian settlements placed in certain centres ... by the Turkish government in order to keep a restraint on the Bedouin ... a large Algerian element in the population ... still maintain(s) [while] the Sudanese have been reduced in numbers since the beginning of the 20th century.
In the late eighteenth century, 3,000 Albanians recruited by Russians were settled in Acre. The Encyclopaedia Britannica finds "most interesting all the non-Arab communities in the country . . . the Samaritan sect in Nablus (Shechem); a gradually disappearing body" once "settled by the Assyrians to occupy the land left waste by the captivity of the Kingdom of Israel."6
The disparate peoples recently assumed and purported to be "settled Arab indigenes, for a thousand years" were in fact a "heterogeneous" community 7 With no "Palestinian" identity, and according to an official British historical analysis in 1920, no Arab identity either: "The people west of the Jordan are not Arabs, but only Arabic-speaking. The bulk of the population are fellahin.... In the Gaza district they are mostly of Egyptian origin; elsewhere they are of the most mixed race." 8
Birthplaces of Inhabitants of Jerusalem. District circa 1931
Moslems Chnstians Others
Palestine
Syria
Transiordan
Cyprus
Egypt
Hejaz-Nejd
Iraq
Yemen
Other Arabian
Territories
Persia
Turkey
Central Asiatic
Territories
Indian Continent
Far Eastern Asia
Algeria
Morocco
Tripoli
Tunis
Other African
Territories
Albania
France
Greece
Spain
United Kingdom
U.S.S.R.
U.S.A.
Central & South
America
Australia
Palestine
Syria
Transiordan
Cyprus
Malta
Other Mediterranean
Islands
Abyssinia
Egypt
Hejaz-Neid
Iraq
Other Arabian
Territories
Persia
Turkey
Central Asiatic
Territories
Indian Continent
Far Eastern Asia
Algeria
Morocco
Tripoli
Tunis
Other African
Territories
Albania
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Czechoslovakia
Denmark
France
Germany
Gibraltar
Greece
Holland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Rumania
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom
U.S.S.R.
Yugoslavia
Canada
U.S.A.
Central & South
America
Australia
Palestine
Syria
Egypt
Persia
Czechoslovakia
Poland
Rumania
Switzeriand
United Kingdom
U.S.S.R.
Languages In Habitual Use In Palestine circa 1931
Moslems Chnstians Others
Afghan
Albanian
Arabic
Bosnian
Chinese
Circassian
English
French
German
Greek
Gypsy
Hebrew
Hindustani
Indian dialects
Javanese
Kurdish
Persian
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Sudanese
Takrurian
Turkish Abyssinian
Arabic
Armenian
Basque
Brazilian [sic]
Bulgarian
Catalan
Chaldean
Chinese
Circassian
Czech
Danish
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Flemish
French
German
Greek
Hebrew
Hindustani
Indian dialects
Irish
Italian
Kurdish
Latin
Magyar
Malayalam
Maltese
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Rumanian
Russian
Serbian
Slavic
Spanish
Sudanese
Swedish
Swiss
Syrian
Turkish
Welsh Arabic
Czech
English
French
German
Hebrew
Persian
Polish
Russian
Spanish
Yiddish
Source: Census of Palestine --1931, volume 1, Palesfine; Part 1, Report by E. Mills, B.A., O.B.E., Assistant Chief Secretary Superintendent of Census (Alexandria, 1933), p. 147.
1. Richard Hartmann, Palestina unter den Araben, 632-1516 (Leipzig, 1915), cited by de Haas, History, p. 147.
2. De Haas, History, p. 258. John of Wurzburg list from Reinhold Rohricht edition, pp. 41, 69.
3. F. Eugene Roger, La Terre Sainte (Paris, 1637), p. 331, cited by de Haas, History, p. 342.
4. Frederich Hasselquist, Reise nach Palastina, etc., 1749-52 (Rostock, 1762), p. 598, cited by de Haas, History, p. 355.
5. Parkes, Whose Land?, p. 212. See Chapters 13 and 14.
6. Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th ed., vol. XX, p. 604.
7. Ibid.
8 .In a handbook, prepared under the direction of the historical section of the Foreign Office, no. 60, entitled "Syria and Palestine" (London, 1920), p. 56.
This page was produced by Joseph E. Katz
Middle Eastern Political and Religious History Analyst
Brooklyn, New York
E-mail to a friend
Source: "From Time Immemorial" by Joan Peters, 1984
My my , thatas a big cut and paste that says ....nothing really .
I do like the list at the end though , oK apart from the fact that it duplicates languages to pad out its claims for those who don't actually bother to read it .
It does contain some real doozies , Latin ..hmmmmm.... a habitual language....if you go to Latin mass or use a scientific name for something .... But Irish ?? thats gotta be the best , whodathunk Palestine would be An gaeltacht , do you think it was grant maintained by the Free State :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
So gawain could you provide a list of ethnic origins for Americans to show that Americans don't exist , or could you possibly put a Canadian and American next to each other and play spot the difference .
oh its just so lame , the same cut and pastes again and again , do you actually read them before you post them ?:inquisitive:
Awwwwww come on gawain , don't you want to play any more ?
Go on post some more of the good rabbis rubbish , its always entertaining to read .....go on be a devil .
Or would you prefer it if I posted some of his revisionist Zionist ramblings ?~;)
No I tire of your silly games. Trying to claim that Jordan isnt an arab nation and wasnt part of Palestine.Quote:
Awwwwww come on gawain , don't you want to play any more ?
Now thats the truth according to the Palestinians .Quote:
The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism.
"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa. While as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan." (PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein, March 31, 1977, interview with the Dutch newspaper Trau.)
awww poor gawain did you forget that you posted that rubbish by the rabbi before , and like the other rubbish he has written that you have posted it is just so easy to rip it apart .
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:Quote:
No I tire of your silly games. Trying to claim that Jordan isnt an arab nation and wasnt part of Palestine.
Oh my you get caught out on a bollox claim you make , a claim that is there for everyone to read , and attack an imaginary claim that exists only in your mind .
A very poor performance Gawain
Just out of interest , would anyone like to explain what would appear to be a rather damning piece of "evidence" from Gawains last post , you know the Statement from the PLO executive .~;)
Go on , there must be someone who can work out why that piece that appears on just about every pro-zionist website is not what it may seem to be :inquisitive:
They wanted to retain pan-Arab support for the struggle rather than be left to fend for themselves? How many of the Arab countries had made their peace with Israel at the time of the statement?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
I don't think any had "made their peace" by that point -- though the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel followed not too long after.
Nice try Pann , you are sort of on the right track , however the strange thing about that statement concerns who the individual is (well was , he got assassinated in '79) what party he belonged to , and what are the aims of that particular party .
Because don't forget , the PLO is an umbrella organisation made up of many different and diverse factions and parties .
BTW it may help if you know that some sources spell his name slightly differently . But on any decent history of the PLO , PNC it will be easy enough to find since most have biographies of members on the executive councils .
I suppose I could post a link, but its more fun this way .
Though if I wanted to have some real fun I could post a link to some more of Katz's stuff:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Oh come on Gawain , let forth a debate on philately , you know you want to :laugh4: