All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss

[Stuartbirdan2]

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?

Link?

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.

Resolution 181 and the Early Phases of the 1948 War
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.....

A quote by Edward I. Koch

I can explain it to you, but I can't comprehend it for you.

www.goodreads.com

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.”

Bullshit.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I don't think you have posted one link/evidence.

Why would I? Your claims are refuted by your own links.

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

The land that we have bought (for the colony of Ghederal constitutes the "soul and spirit" (nefesh vi ruah)
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.

they were finally compelled to sell their lands at the loanshark's price.

DURR.

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

Maybe one should get to know what Virginia Tilley's views are:

https://www.dissentmagazine.org/wp-content/files_mf/1389811297d4Strawson.pdf

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 more

I 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.

There are no Palestinians, just muslims chopping off all the little girls vaginas

And Israel blows them to pieces

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

I don't think you have posted one link/evidence.

Why would I? Your claims are refuted by your own links.

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

The land that we have bought (for the colony of Ghederal constitutes the "soul and spirit" (nefesh vi ruah)
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.

they were finally compelled to sell their lands at the loanshark's price.

DURR.

Both things can't be true?

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

I don't think you have posted one link/evidence.

Why would I? Your claims are refuted by your own links.

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

The land that we have bought (for the colony of Ghederal constitutes the "soul and spirit" (nefesh vi ruah)
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.

they were finally compelled to sell their lands at the loanshark's price.

DURR.

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

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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

Which was about 7% more than the Arab squatters owned.

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

Indeed, Morris himself used the term repeatedly in his discussion with Shavit, in which Morris expressed his view that this “cleansing” of Palestine was morally justified:

Ben-Gurion was right. If he had not done what he did, a state would not have come into being. That has to be clear. It is impossible to evade it. Without uprooting of the Palestinians, a Jewish state would not have arisen here. . . .

There is no justification for acts of rape. There is no justification for acts of massacre. Those are war crimes. But in certain conditions, expulsion is not a war crime. I don’t think that the expulsions of 1948 were war crimes. You can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs. You have to dirty your hands. . . .

There are circumstances in history that justify ethnic cleansing. I know that this term is completely negative in the discourse of the 21st century, but when the choice is between ethnic cleansing and genocide—the annihilation of your people—I prefer ethnic cleansing. . . .

That was the situation. That is what Zionism faced. A Jewish state would not have come into being without the uprooting of 700,000 Palestinians. Therefore it was necessary to uproot them. There was no choice but to expel that population

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

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

Which was about 7% more than the Arab squatters owned.

Link?

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

That was the situation. That is what Zionism faced. A Jewish state would not have come into being without the uprooting of 700,000 Palestinians. Therefore it was necessary to uproot them. There was no choice but to expel that population

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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

Which was about 7% more than the Arab squatters owned.

Link?

Under the Ottoman Land Code of 1858, the state effectively claimed ownership of the land and individuals were regarded as tenants. Subsequently, the law was amended so individuals could register for a title-deed to the land, but landholders often saw no need to do so unless they were interested in selling. Moreover, there were incentives not to register, including the desire to avoid granting legitimacy to the Ottoman government, to avoid paying registration fees and taxes, and to evade possible military conscription.

All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/arab-israeli-war The Palestinian Arabs refused to recognize this arrangement, which they regarded as favorable to the Jews and unfair to the Arab population that would remain in Jewish territory under the partition. The United States sought a...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

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.

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.

Others practice apartheid so it's OK for israel

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

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

Which was about 7% more than the Arab squatters owned.

Link?

Under the Ottoman Land Code of 1858, the state effectively claimed ownership of the land and individuals were regarded as tenants. Subsequently, the law was amended so individuals could register for a title-deed to the land, but landholders often saw no need to do so unless they were interested in selling. Moreover, there were incentives not to register, including the desire to avoid granting legitimacy to the Ottoman government, to avoid paying registration fees and taxes, and to evade possible military conscription.

All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/arab-israeli-war The Palestinian Arabs refused to recognize this arrangement, which they regarded as favorable to the Jews and unfair to the Arab population that would remain in Jewish territory under the partition. The United States sought a...

www.usmessageboard.com

Often...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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

Which was about 7% more than the Arab squatters owned.

Link?

Under the Ottoman Land Code of 1858, the state effectively claimed ownership of the land and individuals were regarded as tenants. Subsequently, the law was amended so individuals could register for a title-deed to the land, but landholders often saw no need to do so unless they were interested in selling. Moreover, there were incentives not to register, including the desire to avoid granting legitimacy to the Ottoman government, to avoid paying registration fees and taxes, and to evade possible military conscription.

All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/arab-israeli-war The Palestinian Arabs refused to recognize this arrangement, which they regarded as favorable to the Jews and unfair to the Arab population that would remain in Jewish territory under the partition. The United States sought a...

www.usmessageboard.com

Often...

Still no back up for 85%? LOL!

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

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

Which was about 7% more than the Arab squatters owned.

Link?

Under the Ottoman Land Code of 1858, the state effectively claimed ownership of the land and individuals were regarded as tenants. Subsequently, the law was amended so individuals could register for a title-deed to the land, but landholders often saw no need to do so unless they were interested in selling. Moreover, there were incentives not to register, including the desire to avoid granting legitimacy to the Ottoman government, to avoid paying registration fees and taxes, and to evade possible military conscription.

All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/arab-israeli-war The Palestinian Arabs refused to recognize this arrangement, which they regarded as favorable to the Jews and unfair to the Arab population that would remain in Jewish territory under the partition. The United States sought a...

www.usmessageboard.com

Additionally, land lived on and cultivated by one individual or family was often registered in the name of another, such as local government magnates who registered large plots or even entire villages in their own names.[50] The British Shaw Commission report of 1929 described another common means by which the rightful owners of the land were legally disenfranchised

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

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

Which was about 7% more than the Arab squatters owned.

Link?

Under the Ottoman Land Code of 1858, the state effectively claimed ownership of the land and individuals were regarded as tenants. Subsequently, the law was amended so individuals could register for a title-deed to the land, but landholders often saw no need to do so unless they were interested in selling. Moreover, there were incentives not to register, including the desire to avoid granting legitimacy to the Ottoman government, to avoid paying registration fees and taxes, and to evade possible military conscription.

All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/arab-israeli-war The Palestinian Arabs refused to recognize this arrangement, which they regarded as favorable to the Jews and unfair to the Arab population that would remain in Jewish territory under the partition. The United States sought a...

www.usmessageboard.com

Often...

Still no back up for 85%? LOL!

Reading is fundamental

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

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

Which was about 7% more than the Arab squatters owned.

Link?

Under the Ottoman Land Code of 1858, the state effectively claimed ownership of the land and individuals were regarded as tenants. Subsequently, the law was amended so individuals could register for a title-deed to the land, but landholders often saw no need to do so unless they were interested in selling. Moreover, there were incentives not to register, including the desire to avoid granting legitimacy to the Ottoman government, to avoid paying registration fees and taxes, and to evade possible military conscription.

All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/arab-israeli-war The Palestinian Arabs refused to recognize this arrangement, which they regarded as favorable to the Jews and unfair to the Arab population that would remain in Jewish territory under the partition. The United States sought a...

www.usmessageboard.com

Often...

Still no back up for 85%? LOL!

The Ottomans stole land and then sold it to the zionists

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

I don't think you have posted one link/evidence.

Why would I? Your claims are refuted by your own links.

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

The land that we have bought (for the colony of Ghederal constitutes the "soul and spirit" (nefesh vi ruah)
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.

they were finally compelled to sell their lands at the loanshark's price.

DURR.

85%?

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

Maybe one should get to know what Virginia Tilley's views are:

https://www.dissentmagazine.org/wp-content/files_mf/1389811297d4Strawson.pdf

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 more

I 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.

A quote by Edward I. Koch

I can explain it to you, but I can't comprehend it for you.

www.goodreads.com

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

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

Which was about 7% more than the Arab squatters owned.

Squatters live on and farm the land for decades?