Israel/Palestine Question

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Lets look at the issue from another angle.

Did the slaves live on land in the south? When the south lost should they have been given the land they lived on? If I rent a house from a man he he defaults on his mortage does that make it mine?

[Papewaio]

Lets look at the issue from another angle.

Did the slaves live on land in the south? When the south lost should they have been given the land they lived on? If I rent a house from a man he he defaults on his mortage does that make it mine?

I think the parrallel is closer to American Indians... what obligations do they have to the USA and vice a versa?

[mercian billman]

Lets look at the issue from another angle.

Did the slaves live on land in the south? When the south lost should they have been given the land they lived on?

Yes* the slaves should've been given the land, and in some cases they were given land only to have it confiscated at a later date. I don't think the example of how ex-slaves were sold out, should be used as a model for anything.

Why should jews who never lived in the middle east be allowed to emigrate there and displace people who already lived there? Shouldn't they have displaced the people who oppressed them during WW2?

If I rent a house from a man he he defaults on his mortage does that make it mine?

No, because when you rent a house from a man you sign a legal contract, IIRC slaves did not sign legal contracts.

*I'm not in favor reperations, but in the period following the Civil War I would've been in favor of compensating ex-slaves for their un-paid labor.

[Don Corleone]

You know Beirut, if you quit using that term Zionist, and admit Jordan and Syria have ransacked Palestian hopes every bit as much as Israel has, you just might have a convert. No shit.

[Papewaio]

Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the “Freedom Party” (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine.

The current visit of Menachem Begin, leader of this party, to the United States is obviously calculated to give the impression of American support for his party in the coming Israeli elections, and to cement political ties with conservative Zionist elements in the United States. Several Americans of national repute have lent their names to welcome his visit. It is inconceivable that those who oppose fascism throughout the world, if correctly informed as to Mr. Begin’s political record and perspectives, could add their names and support to the movement he represents.

Before irreparable damage is done by way of financial contributions, public manifestations in Begin’s behalf, and the creation in Palestine of the impression that a large segment of America supports Fascist elements in Israel, the American public must be informed as to the record and objectives of Mr. Begin and his movement.

The public avowals of Begin’s party are no guide whatever to its actual character. Today they speak of freedom, democracy and anti-imperialism, whereas until recently they openly preached the doctrine of the Fascist state. It is in its actions that the terrorist party betrays its real character; from its past actions we can judge what it may be expected to do in the future.

Attack on Arab Village

A shocking example was their behavior in the Arab village of Deir Yassin. This village, off the main roads and surrounded by Jewish lands, had taken no part in the war, and had even fought off Arab bands who wanted to use the village as their base. On April 9 (THE NEW YORK TIMES), terrorist bands attacked this peaceful village, which was not a military objective in the fighting, killed most of its inhabitants — 240 men, women, and children — and kept a few of them alive to parade as captives through the streets of Jerusalem. Most of the Jewish community was horrified at the deed, and the Jewish Agency sent a telegram of apology to King Abdullah of Trans-Jordan. But the terrorists, far from being ashamed of their act, were proud of this massacre, publicized it widely, and invited all the foreign correspondents present in the country to view the heaped corpses and the general havoc at Deir Yassin.

The Deir Yassin incident exemplifies the character and actions of the Freedom Party.

Within the Jewish community they have preached an admixture of ultranationalism, religious mysticism, and racial superiority. Like other Fascist parties they have been used to break strikes, and have themselves pressed for the destruction of free trade unions. In their stead they have proposed corporate unions on the Italian Fascist model.

During the last years of sporadic anti-British violence, the IZL and Stern groups inaugurated a reign of terror in the Palestine Jewish community. Teachers were beaten up for speaking against them, adults were shot for not letting their children join them. By gangster methods, beatings, window-smashing, and wide-spread robberies, the terrorists intimidated the population and exacted a heavy tribute.

The people of the Freedom Party have had no part in the constructive achievements in Palestine. They have reclaimed no land, built no settlements, and only detracted from the Jewish defense activity. Their much-publicized immigration endeavors were minute, and devoted mainly to bringing in Fascist compatriots.

Discrepancies Seen

The discrepancies between the bold claims now being made by Begin and his party, and their record of past performance in Palestine bear the imprint of no ordinary political party. This is the unmistakable stamp of a Fascist party for whom terrorism (against Jews, Arabs, and British alike), and misrepresentation are means, and a “Leader State” is the goal.

In the light of the foregoing considerations, it is imperative that the truth about Mr. Begin and his movement be made known in this country. It is all the more tragic that the top leadership of American Zionism has refused to campaign against Begin’s efforts, or even to expose to its own constituents the dangers to Israel from support to Begin.

The undersigned therefore take this means of publicly presenting a few salient facts concerning Begin and his party; and of urging all concerned not to support this latest manifestation of fascism.

...

[Don Corleone]

Didn't Menachem Begin die in 1980? Your article is quoting him as the current leader. What is your point with that quote?

EDIT: I'm sorry, he died in 1992. Again, what is your point? Should we be aruging that the Palestinians are still warring against the US because of the Achille Lauro hijacking?

[Papewaio]

First who signed this letter?

Second it kind of contradicts the modern view that no one lived in Palestine.

Third it mentions some of the less then savoury methods that where used to create the current state. Which in turn is having the same methods turned back on them.

Fourth it is always good to look at history when we are discussing a historical problem...

[Don Corleone]

I apologize.

I did not realize you were making a post based on historical arguments. Perhaps a note of editorial intent would have helped.

One, I have no idea, you posted no signatories. I suspect that was your intent.

Two, I personally have never subsribed to the "There was nobody living in Palestine" argument.

Three, I fail to see where Begin asked Zionsit settler women to ask their children to strap bombs to their bodies and blow the Brittish mandate troops up.

Fourth, Yes it is. Interesting perspective. As I said in point one, I wish you had framed it in that light.

Like I said to Beirut, I will say to you, I don't disagree with the idea of two homelands. Until each people have a homeland of their own, we will continue to see more of what we have seen. I am on the side of whomever will accept that compromise. Unfortunately, I see little compromise on either side. When I see a Palestinian textbook with a map of Israel, and I see an Israeli map with charted Palestinian water rights, I will believe we have a solution. Until then, I see round 9.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Yes* the slaves should've been given the land, and in some cases they were given land only to have it confiscated at a later date. I don't think the example of how ex-slaves were sold out, should be used as a model for anything.

I guess if your a share cropper and your landlord dies you should get his land also.

Why should jews who never lived in the middle east be allowed to emigrate there and displace people who already lived there?

Why should arabs who never lived in Palestine be allowed to emigrate there and displace people who already lived there?

No, because when you rent a house from a man you sign a legal contract, IIRC slaves did not sign legal contracts.

The palestinians were not slaves but rented the land they lived on and had a legal contract to do so. The land belonged to Turkish landlords not the people working on the land.

*I'm not in favor reperations, but in the period following the Civil War I would've been in favor of compensating ex-slaves for their un-paid labor.

And who would pay then the south? They were broke. Why should the North pay they freed them.

[mercian billman]

I guess if your a share cropper and your landlord dies you should get his land also.

Where the hell did you get the idea I believed this?

When someone agrees to become a sharecropper they do so under a contract however unfair it may be. However people did not choose to become slaves.

Why should arabs who never lived in Palestine be allowed to emigrate there and displace people who already lived there?

First of all could you show a link that Arabs emigrated to Palestine and displaced other Arabs, and secondly why should jews who never lived in Palestine be allowed to emigrate there, knowing that only violence will follow? Why should the people of Palestine be displaced following WW2, to accomodate others, when they played a relatively minor role in the conflict?

The palestinians were not slaves but rented the land they lived on and had a legal contract to do so. The land belonged to Turkish landlords not the people working on the land.

here is a link which states jewish landownership as of 1943, the survey was compiled by the British mandate for the UN.

About 6% of land was owned by jews while the British mandate lists the other 94% being owned by Arabs and non jews, maybe Turkish landlords owned the majority of the 94% or the British thought Arab and Turkish were interchangable, but clearly the majority of land wasn't owned by jews.

My question is this how exactly did the ownership of the land change from Turkish to Jewish? Even if they didn't own the land, are you telling me that people who have lived on land that's been farmed on by their families for generations wouldn't feel attachment? Don't you think they'd be a little pissed to learn their being displaced?

And who would pay then the south? They were broke. Why should the North pay they freed them.

As I said earlier I would be in favor of dividing plantation land and giving it to the slaves or allowing them to buy it. At the very least the original owners should not have been able to simply go back to their land. People have had their property confiscated for a lot less than commiting treason and have been punished far worse.

Seizure of plantations owned by slave owners would not have been unfair, nor would it have been overly harsh, especially when you consider the crime (treason) they commited.

[Tribesman]

Is false the best you can come up with.
Been through it all before gawain , refresh your memory , you repeat the same falsehoods in every debate about the Palestine/Israel situation .
But hey don't let little things like facts get in your way .

the other 94% being owned by Arabs and non jews,
Not quite Mercian , over 40% of the land was previously either Ottoman government owned holdings , land held by bankrupted companies that had been taken over under the mandate , functioning companies that signed their holdings over to the mandate authority and church owned land that had been handed over .

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Been through it all before Tribesman , refresh your memory , you repeat the same falsehoods in every debate about the Palestine/Israel situation .
But hey don't let little things like facts get in your way .

First of all could you show a link that Arabs emigrated to Palestine and displaced other Arabs,

I have shown that most arabs in Palestine did so after the Jews also began emigrating there more times than I care to count. Your not new here youve seen them before.

and secondly why should jews who never lived in Palestine be allowed to emigrate there,

And why should arabs who never lived in Palestine be allowed to emigrate there ?

Why should the people of Palestine be displaced following WW2, to accomodate others, when they played a relatively minor role in the conflict?

They knew the land was promised to Israel when most of them moved there. It wasnt as if it came as surprise. I guess its only fair when its the Jews who are the ones being displaced.

Seizure of plantations owned by slave owners would not have been unfair, nor would it have been overly harsh, especially when you consider the crime (treason) they commited.

The south was broke as it was. What you suggest would have caused endless conflict and even more hatred for blacks in the south. They had no legal right to the land just as the so called Palestinians had no right to the land they didnt own.

[mercian billman]

the other 94% being owned by Arabs and non jews,
Not quite Mercian , over 40% of the land was previously either Ottoman government owned holdings , land held by bankrupted companies that had been taken over under the mandate , functioning companies that signed their holdings over to the mandate authority and church owned land that had been handed over .

Thanks for the info, to me it looks like the Palestinians (or arabs since the Palestinians didn't exist then owned roughly 50%.)

What I'm wondering is how the jews then managed to get a hold of the remaining land, was it sold to them after WW2 and if so were Palestinians prevented from bidding on the land? Was the land simply handed to jews? Theres more questions, but these are all I can really think of right now.

[Beirut]

You know Beirut, if you quit using that term Zionist, and admit Jordan and Syria have ransacked Palestian hopes every bit as much as Israel has, you just might have a convert. No shit.

I say Zionist because it was the Zionists who planned and carried out the invasion (and it was an invasion) of Palestine with the premeditated goal of taking over the entire country. Not sharing it. Anyone who thinks the Zionists were happy-happy to share the country should read the words of Theodore Hertzl, ben-Gurion and other Zionist leaders. They said from day one that they wanted all the land and were prepared to got to war to get it. That is an invasion.

You are 100% correct that the neighbouring Arab states have behaved terribly towards the Palestinians. This is one of the main reasons I stick up for the Palestinians, because they have no friends, everybody screws them over and people constantly refer to them as animals and terrorists and somewhat less than human. And we all now where that kind of degradation leads...

Concentration camps. Just like the ones the Palestinians live in under brutal Israeli subjugation.