Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I don't think you have posted one link/evidence. You just run ur mouthLink?In sum, there was a consensus that such a sizable population of Arabs within the borders of their desired “Jewish state” was unacceptable.
There was?
Is that why your source lied and said 85% of the land was owned by Arabs?
You have a source that proves 85% ownership?
What are you waiting for, Buttercup? Post it!!!
Benny Morris’s Untenable Denial of the Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine
Israeli historian Benny Morris denies the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, but his own research shows that this was indeed how Israel came into being.www.foreignpolicyjournal.com
If Benny has proof the Arabs owned 85%, cut and paste that portion of your link.
Says your mouthYou have rewritten history. Aka Lies against the Jews.My evidence does not live up to your high standardsI am trying to educateThe Ottomans stole the land
You should sue!!!
Try using facts for once.
I don't see "not 85%"Where did it say that?The Ottoman fiscal and land reforms (of the second phase of tanzimat), which first took
effect in Palestine around 1870, soon resulted in the peasantry losing title to much of the land
they cultivated (Schumacher 1889; Post 1891).
Sounds awful!!!!
Thanks for admitting your previous 85% link was a lie.
"soon resulted in the peasantry losing title to much of the land they cultivated"
I am Jewish. I went to Israel. I walked into a small store in Bethlehem. What if I had taken out a gun, shot the shopkeeper, took cash from the register and shouted: "my people owned this land 2000 years ago"This "article " you keep posting sees Jews as NOT the indigenous people of the land.The land that we have bought (for the colony of Ghederal constitutes the "soul and spirit" (nefesh vi ruah)“The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 percent of the land.”
An Arab renting from an absentee landlord, or squatting on the land, didn't suddenly own the
land once the Ottoman Empire was defeated.
of the [Arab] village [of Qatra]. The villagers borrowed from the French moneylender Polivar at such a
high rate that they were finally compelled to sell their lands at the loanshark's price. As long as Polivar
remained owner of the land, the fel laheen did not feel the full burden of their misfortune because he leased
it to them. But now that the fellaheen realize that our [Jewish] brothers work the land on their own, and will
not lease it ... the fellaheen are bare-how will they come by their daily bread? [15 November 1885, Muyal
to Pinsker, in Druyanov 1919,1:670-71]
The Ottoman fiscal and land reforms (of the second phase of tanzimat), which first took
effect in Palestine around 1870, soon resulted in the peasantry losing title to much of the land
they cultivated (Schumacher 1889; Post 1891). But life conditions hardly deteriorated: improved
physical security and opportunities provided by the emerging agricultural market more than
offset the cost of paying rent to absentee titleholders (Scholch 1984; Gilbar 1986; cf. Oliphant
1887). Then came the Jewish colonists. Exchanging meager savings for precious deeds in Zion,
they had left behind the alienating commerce of pogrom-ridden Eastern Europe to work the land
of Abraham and Isaac for themselves: "that is why, all of a sudden, many fellaheen had no land
to till; this affected their very existence and provoked the conflicts [at Petah Tikvah] that set our
(Arab] brothers against us" (4 April 1886, Hirsch to Pinsker, in Druyanov 1919,1:746-54, 761-
65). Many of these early colonists were genuinely surprised to find the children of Abraham's
half-forgotten son, Ishmael, still dwelling on their father's land. A few saw the Arabs as long-lost
brothers. Others dreamed the Arabs could be forced back to their desert banishment. The Arab
peasants, it appears, were similarly disconcerted.
The Surrogate Colonization Of Palestine, 1917-1939
The "surrogate colonization" of Palestine had a foreign power giving to a nonnative group rights over land occupied by an indigenous people. It thus brought into play the complementary and conflicting agendas of three culturally distinguishable parties: British, Jews and Arabs. Each party had...hal.archives-ouvertes.fr
Guess where this article belongs.
Toxic field with the rest of the Arab Muslim trash they keep inventing.
Jews ARE the indigenous people of the land.
Arabs are the invaders.
The native Americans are indigenousThis "article " you keep posting sees Jews as NOT the indigenous people of the land.The land that we have bought (for the colony of Ghederal constitutes the "soul and spirit" (nefesh vi ruah)“The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 percent of the land.”
An Arab renting from an absentee landlord, or squatting on the land, didn't suddenly own the
land once the Ottoman Empire was defeated.
of the [Arab] village [of Qatra]. The villagers borrowed from the French moneylender Polivar at such a
high rate that they were finally compelled to sell their lands at the loanshark's price. As long as Polivar
remained owner of the land, the fel laheen did not feel the full burden of their misfortune because he leased
it to them. But now that the fellaheen realize that our [Jewish] brothers work the land on their own, and will
not lease it ... the fellaheen are bare-how will they come by their daily bread? [15 November 1885, Muyal
to Pinsker, in Druyanov 1919,1:670-71]
The Ottoman fiscal and land reforms (of the second phase of tanzimat), which first took
effect in Palestine around 1870, soon resulted in the peasantry losing title to much of the land
they cultivated (Schumacher 1889; Post 1891). But life conditions hardly deteriorated: improved
physical security and opportunities provided by the emerging agricultural market more than
offset the cost of paying rent to absentee titleholders (Scholch 1984; Gilbar 1986; cf. Oliphant
1887). Then came the Jewish colonists. Exchanging meager savings for precious deeds in Zion,
they had left behind the alienating commerce of pogrom-ridden Eastern Europe to work the land
of Abraham and Isaac for themselves: "that is why, all of a sudden, many fellaheen had no land
to till; this affected their very existence and provoked the conflicts [at Petah Tikvah] that set our
(Arab] brothers against us" (4 April 1886, Hirsch to Pinsker, in Druyanov 1919,1:746-54, 761-
65). Many of these early colonists were genuinely surprised to find the children of Abraham's
half-forgotten son, Ishmael, still dwelling on their father's land. A few saw the Arabs as long-lost
brothers. Others dreamed the Arabs could be forced back to their desert banishment. The Arab
peasants, it appears, were similarly disconcerted.
The Surrogate Colonization Of Palestine, 1917-1939
The "surrogate colonization" of Palestine had a foreign power giving to a nonnative group rights over land occupied by an indigenous people. It thus brought into play the complementary and conflicting agendas of three culturally distinguishable parties: British, Jews and Arabs. Each party had...
Guess where this article belongs.
Toxic field with the rest of the Arab Muslim trash they keep inventing.
Jews ARE the indigenous people of the land.
Arabs are the invaders.
Resolution 181 and the Early Phases of the 1948 WarLink?In sum, there was a consensus that such a sizable population of Arabs within the borders of their desired “Jewish state” was unacceptable.
There was?
Is that why your source lied and said 85% of the land was owned by Arabs?
You have a source that proves 85% ownership?
What are you waiting for, Buttercup? Post it!!!Benny Morris’s Untenable Denial of the Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine
Israeli historian Benny Morris denies the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, but his own research shows that this was indeed how Israel came into being.
If Benny has proof the Arabs owned 85%, cut and paste that portion of your link.
Despite their best efforts, by the end of the Mandate, the Jewish settlers had managed to acquire only about 7 percent of the land in Palestine. Arabs owned more land than Jews in every single district, including Jaffa, which included the largest Jewish population center, Tel Aviv. According to the UNSCOP report, “The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 percent of the land.” A subcommittee report further observed that “The bulk of the land in the Arab State, as well as in the proposed Jewish State, is owned and possessed by Arabs” (emphasis added). Furthermore, the Jewish population in the area of their proposed state was 498,000, while the number of Arabs was 407,000 plus an estimated 105,000 Bedouins. “In other words,” the subcommittee report noted, “at the outset, the Arabs will have a majority in the proposed Jewish State.”
UNSCOP nevertheless proposed that the Arab state be constituted from about 44 percent of the whole of Palestine, while the Jews would be awarded about 55 percent for their state, including the best agricultural lands. The committee was not incognizant of how this plan prejudiced the rights of the majority Arab population. In fact, in keeping with the prejudice inherent in the Mandate, the UNSCOP report explicitly rejected the right of the Arab Palestinians to self-determination. The “principle of self-determination” was “not applied to Palestine,” the report stated, “obviously because of the intention to make possible the creation of the Jewish National Home there. Actually, it may well be said that the Jewish National Home and the sui generis Mandate for Palestine run counter to that principle
The resources of the country are still virgin soil and will be developed by the Jewish immigrants.
I don't think you have posted one link/evidence.
I don't see "not 85%"Where did it say that?The Ottoman fiscal and land reforms (of the second phase of tanzimat), which first took
effect in Palestine around 1870, soon resulted in the peasantry losing title to much of the land
they cultivated (Schumacher 1889; Post 1891).
Sounds awful!!!!
Thanks for admitting your previous 85% link was a lie.
"soon resulted in the peasantry losing title to much of the land they cultivated"
There are no Palestinians, just muslims chopping off all the little girls vaginasI do not believe that. It is Tilley who wrote that article. I just post articles which show the thinking of those who are ignorant of facts and end up being on the side of the Palestinians without caring what they are about.Do you believe that Israel should start lobbing unguided rockets into the terrorist areas like the terrorist do to Israel. I have bacon and porkrinds if you need moreMaybe one should get to know what Virginia Tilley's views are:
https://www.dissentmagazine.org/wp-content/files_mf/1389811297d4Strawson.pdf
Not enoughThe Israelis kill a lot more civiliansDo you believe that Israel should start lobbing unguided rockets into the terrorist areas like the terrorist do to Israel. I have bacon and porkrinds if you need moreMaybe one should get to know what Virginia Tilley's views are:
https://www.dissentmagazine.org/wp-content/files_mf/1389811297d4Strawson.pdf
www.jpost.com
A case for the one state solution.Just as no one notices who’s Arab and who’s Jewish at my favorite open-air market, no one pays much attention to ethnicity at the hospital, either.
(full article online)
Oh no, an article on Israeli ‘apartheid’ - opinion
Just as no one notices who’s Arab and who’s Jewish at my favorite open-air market, no one pays much attention to ethnicity at the hospital, either. We’re so far past that.
You have no case.A case for the one state solution.Just as no one notices who’s Arab and who’s Jewish at my favorite open-air market, no one pays much attention to ethnicity at the hospital, either.
(full article online)
Oh no, an article on Israeli ‘apartheid’ - opinion
Just as no one notices who’s Arab and who’s Jewish at my favorite open-air market, no one pays much attention to ethnicity at the hospital, either. We’re so far past that.
I don't disagree with that implication, but that does not excuse apartheid Israeli policies which are enacted and enforced in many other countries where Communist Party secular Jews have gained significant political power.So if you accept that this report proves Israel is an "apartheid state" you must agree that so are many, many other states that also fall under that definition.
Resolution 181 and the Early Phases of the 1948 WarLink?In sum, there was a consensus that such a sizable population of Arabs within the borders of their desired “Jewish state” was unacceptable.
There was?
Is that why your source lied and said 85% of the land was owned by Arabs?
You have a source that proves 85% ownership?
What are you waiting for, Buttercup? Post it!!!Benny Morris’s Untenable Denial of the Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine
Israeli historian Benny Morris denies the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, but his own research shows that this was indeed how Israel came into being.
If Benny has proof the Arabs owned 85%, cut and paste that portion of your link.
Despite their best efforts, by the end of the Mandate, the Jewish settlers had managed to acquire only about 7 percent of the land in Palestine. Arabs owned more land than Jews in every single district, including Jaffa, which included the largest Jewish population center, Tel Aviv. According to the UNSCOP report, “The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 percent of the land.” A subcommittee report further observed that “The bulk of the land in the Arab State, as well as in the proposed Jewish State, is owned and possessed by Arabs” (emphasis added). Furthermore, the Jewish population in the area of their proposed state was 498,000, while the number of Arabs was 407,000 plus an estimated 105,000 Bedouins. “In other words,” the subcommittee report noted, “at the outset, the Arabs will have a majority in the proposed Jewish State.”
UNSCOP nevertheless proposed that the Arab state be constituted from about 44 percent of the whole of Palestine, while the Jews would be awarded about 55 percent for their state, including the best agricultural lands. The committee was not incognizant of how this plan prejudiced the rights of the majority Arab population. In fact, in keeping with the prejudice inherent in the Mandate, the UNSCOP report explicitly rejected the right of the Arab Palestinians to self-determination. The “principle of self-determination” was “not applied to Palestine,” the report stated, “obviously because of the intention to make possible the creation of the Jewish National Home there. Actually, it may well be said that the Jewish National Home and the sui generis Mandate for Palestine run counter to that principle
Resolution 181 and the Early Phases of the 1948 War
I saw your unbacked source the first time you posted it.
And then you posted a source that said the Arab squatters never registered land, because they didn't want to pay taxes. Then you posted a source that said the Arab squatters lost title to land they farmed.
I think that's called a self goal.....
www.foreignpolicyjournal.com
Says uI don't think you have posted one link/evidence.
Why would I? Your claims are refuted by your own links.
I don't think you have posted one link/evidence.
Why would I? Your claims are refuted by your own links.
hal.archives-ouvertes.fr
Says a screenshot
