Are the Palestinians a real people?
- Thread starter ForeverYoung436
- Start date
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 21,143
- 4,483
- 290
The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel
What’s in a name? In the case of the Arabs, it tells you what their tribe and country of origin are. It also dispels the biggest fallacy the “Palestinians” would like you to believe.
The Arabs mark May the 15th as a day of remembrance for the catastrophe, the “Nakba” in Arabic, that befell them with the creation of the State of Israel. They claim the “indigenous” Arab inhabitants had to flee their “homeland” as a result. They conveniently fail to mention the reason for the “catastrophe” and where these supposed indigenous Arab inhabitants actually came from and when.
UN General Assembly resolution 181 of 1947 called for the partition of the British Mandate in Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab entities. The Jewish leadership accepted the resolution. The Arabs countries rejected it, which is their right. What they had no right to, was to declare war on the Jewish population in the area.
The armies of seven Arab countries set out to destroy the Jewish state, which they outnumbered a hundred to one. They also persecuted the Jewish citizens who lived in their own countries for hundreds of years, forcing them to leave and take refuge in the newly created State of Israel.
The Arab nations, together with the Arab population in the British Mandate area, sought to annihilate the Jews in the region and failed. The only catastrophe for them in this scenario was that they lost the war.
As in any war, people were uprooted and made to relocate. Nearly a million Jews – who were not even involved in the hostilities – were expelled from Arab countries; and over 600,000 Arabs from Israeli territory, many of whom were actually told to leave by the advancing Arab armies.
The “Mandate for Palestine” by the League of Nations (1922) defined the borders of the homeland of the Jewish people as the area between the Jordan river in the east, to the Mediterranean Sea in the west. This, as explained, due to a long historical and deep religious connection of the Jews to this land. It defined “Jews” as the people of the land which the San Remo commission (1920) called “Palestine”, using the old Roman title “Syria-Palestina”, given by Caesar Hadrian, in 132 a.d.
The Jews brought back the original name of “Israel” (ישראל) after almost 2000 years. To counter that, the Arabs adopted the Roman term “Palestine”, a word which is has no meaning in Arabic. Although the original founding document of the Palestine Liberation Organization terror group, the “PLO” said in 1964 (Article 24): “This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or in the Himmah Area”, the PLO emblem, as well as that of the Hamas, define a “Palestine” in the same exact borders the League of Nations used for the Land of Israel: from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.
They claimed indigenous status as “Palestinians” who lived in the area for generations. A review of history though, shows that from the time of the expulsion of the Jews by the Romans, the inhabitants of the area fluctuated.
From the time of the conquest of the land by the Muslim Arabs in 636 CE, the rulers of the land constantly shifted between Muslims, Crusaders, Arab Tribes among themselves and even the Mongols. This until 1517, with the Ottoman conquest that brought a measure of relative stability to the country, but also not for long.
The waves of conquests and wars; natural calamities such as earth quakes, harsh living conditions; as well as the periodic plundering of Arab Bedouin tribes from the desert, made the area undesirable. There are relatively few elements that can prove continuity of settlement in the Land of Israel whether Jew or Arab.
Thus, on the eve of the Zionist settlement, which began with the founding of Petah Tikva in 1878, the country was mostly deserted and abandoned. Its population was sparse and partly nomadic. Famous tourists who visited Israel at the time testified separately to this situation: They found a small rural Bedouin population living in muddy huts and described the place as a marshland, mostly uncultivated terrain, used as a grazing fields for goats and sheep. The local inhabitants were not the owners of the land. The owners were wealthy families from throughout the Ottoman Empire, who had no use for the land beyond the titles and honors it bestowed upon them.
With the migration of Jews to the Land of Israel between 1870 and 1947, the Arab population in the area grew by 270%, nearly three times that of Egypt, the Arab country with the highest natural birthrate at the time. In other words, the increase was mostly due to migration.
The mass immigration was the result of economic development and modernization following Jewish immigration. The Arab immigrants came in search of a livelihood.
Tawfiq Bey al-Hourani, the Syrian governor of Hauran, said in 1934 that “over 30,000 Syrians invaded Palestine within a few months.”
Winston Churchill, on May 22, 1939, stated that Arab immigration during the Mandate period to Palestine was so great that their numbers grew by such a rate that even the Jews of the entire world could not match.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, President of the United States, said on May 17, 1939 that the immigration of Arabs to Palestine since 1921 was far greater than the immigration of Jews in recent times.
According to the British census in 1931, the Muslims in the country were not necessarily Arabs, judging from the languages they spoke: Afghan, Albanian, Arabic, Bosnian, Circassian, Kurdish, Persian, Sudanese and Turkish.
The Arabs themselves admit that Palestinian identity is forged as we showed in a previous article by Judith Bergman and as seen in the following video:
It is clear from this that Arabs migrated en masse to the area around the same time as Jews immigrated here. But there is another, very simple way to identify the origins of the Arabs, and that is according to their surnames. In the Arab communities, the surnames identify the tribe, or clans which one belongs to, a country or a region of their roots, and in some cases a profession.
It is important to stress that in the tribal culture the loyalty of each individual is first and foremost to their tribe and family. The western concept of nationalism is foreign to the Arabs’ tribal cultural. This is one of the reasons that with the fall of the central authority in Arab countries in the past decade, those nations have fallen into disarray.
Yasser Arafat’s full name for example, is Yasser Yusuf Arafat, Al-Qudwa, Al-Husseini. While he claimed he was born in Jerusalem, he was born in Cairo and his father’s family originates from the tribe of Al-Qudwa, which is in Syria. His mother, Husseini, was an Egyptian citizen, though the name exposes her roots in the region between Iraq and Saudi Arabia.
Here are some of the origins of common Arabic surnames one can easily find in any phone book in Israel, as well as on the map which reveals their location of origin (Since these names are all in Arabic, some might be spelled differently in other places):
Al-Turki – Turkey
Sultan – Turkey
Uthuman / Ottoman – Turkey
Al Masri – Egypt
Masrawa – Egypt
Al Tartir – Tartir village, Egypt
Bardawil – Lake and village Bardawil, Egypt
Tarabin – South-east Sinai (Bedouin), Egypt
Abu-Suta / Abu-Seeta – Tarabin tribe, Egypt
Sha’alan – Bedouin, Egypt
Fayumi – Al-Fayum village, Egypt
Al Bana – Egypt
Al-Baghdadi – Baghdad, Iraq
Abbas – Baghdad, Iraq
Zoabi – West Iraq
Al-Faruki – Iraq
Al-Tachriti – Iraq
Zabaide / Zubeidy – Iraq
Husseini / Hussein – Saudi Arabia (Hussein was the 4th Imam)
Tamimi – Saudi Arabia
Hejazi – Hejaz region (Red Sea shoreline) in Saudi Arabia
Al-Kurash / Al Kurashi – Saudi Arabia
Ta’amari – Saudi Arabia
Al-Halabi – Haleb region, North Syria
Al-Allawi – West Syria (shoreline)
Al-Hurani – Huran District, South Syria
Al-Qudwa – Syria
Nashashibi – Syria
Khamati – Syria
Lubnani – Lebanon
Sidawi – Sidon, Lebanon
Al-Surani – Sour-Tair, South Lebanon
Al-Yamani – Yemen
Al-Azad – Yemen
Hadadin – Yemen
Matar – Matar village. Yemen
Morad – Yemen
Khamadan – Yemen
Mugrabi – Maghreb, Morocco
Al-Araj – Morocco
Bushnak – Bosnia
Al-Shashani – Chechnya
Al-Jazir – Algiers
Al-Abid (Bedouin) – Sudan
Samahadna (Bedouin) – Sudan (still a matter of debate)
Al-Hamis – Bahrain
Zarqawi – Jordan
Tarabulsi – Tripoli, Lebanon
The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel
What’s in a name? In the case of the Arabs, it tells you what their tribe and country of origin are. It also dispels the biggest fallacy the “Palestinians” would like you to believe.
The Arabs mark May the 15th as a day of remembrance for the catastrophe, the “Nakba” in Arabic, that befell them with the creation of the State of Israel. They claim the “indigenous” Arab inhabitants had to flee their “homeland” as a result. They conveniently fail to mention the reason for the “catastrophe” and where these supposed indigenous Arab inhabitants actually came from and when.
UN General Assembly resolution 181 of 1947 called for the partition of the British Mandate in Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab entities. The Jewish leadership accepted the resolution. The Arabs countries rejected it, which is their right. What they had no right to, was to declare war on the Jewish population in the area.
The armies of seven Arab countries set out to destroy the Jewish state, which they outnumbered a hundred to one. They also persecuted the Jewish citizens who lived in their own countries for hundreds of years, forcing them to leave and take refuge in the newly created State of Israel.
The Arab nations, together with the Arab population in the British Mandate area, sought to annihilate the Jews in the region and failed. The only catastrophe for them in this scenario was that they lost the war.
As in any war, people were uprooted and made to relocate. Nearly a million Jews – who were not even involved in the hostilities – were expelled from Arab countries; and over 600,000 Arabs from Israeli territory, many of whom were actually told to leave by the advancing Arab armies.
The “Mandate for Palestine” by the League of Nations (1922) defined the borders of the homeland of the Jewish people as the area between the Jordan river in the east, to the Mediterranean Sea in the west. This, as explained, due to a long historical and deep religious connection of the Jews to this land. It defined “Jews” as the people of the land which the San Remo commission (1920) called “Palestine”, using the old Roman title “Syria-Palestina”, given by Caesar Hadrian, in 132 a.d.
The Jews brought back the original name of “Israel” (ישראל) after almost 2000 years. To counter that, the Arabs adopted the Roman term “Palestine”, a word which is has no meaning in Arabic. Although the original founding document of the Palestine Liberation Organization terror group, the “PLO” said in 1964 (Article 24): “This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or in the Himmah Area”, the PLO emblem, as well as that of the Hamas, define a “Palestine” in the same exact borders the League of Nations used for the Land of Israel: from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.
They claimed indigenous status as “Palestinians” who lived in the area for generations. A review of history though, shows that from the time of the expulsion of the Jews by the Romans, the inhabitants of the area fluctuated.
From the time of the conquest of the land by the Muslim Arabs in 636 CE, the rulers of the land constantly shifted between Muslims, Crusaders, Arab Tribes among themselves and even the Mongols. This until 1517, with the Ottoman conquest that brought a measure of relative stability to the country, but also not for long.
The waves of conquests and wars; natural calamities such as earth quakes, harsh living conditions; as well as the periodic plundering of Arab Bedouin tribes from the desert, made the area undesirable. There are relatively few elements that can prove continuity of settlement in the Land of Israel whether Jew or Arab.
Thus, on the eve of the Zionist settlement, which began with the founding of Petah Tikva in 1878, the country was mostly deserted and abandoned. Its population was sparse and partly nomadic. Famous tourists who visited Israel at the time testified separately to this situation: They found a small rural Bedouin population living in muddy huts and described the place as a marshland, mostly uncultivated terrain, used as a grazing fields for goats and sheep. The local inhabitants were not the owners of the land. The owners were wealthy families from throughout the Ottoman Empire, who had no use for the land beyond the titles and honors it bestowed upon them.
With the migration of Jews to the Land of Israel between 1870 and 1947, the Arab population in the area grew by 270%, nearly three times that of Egypt, the Arab country with the highest natural birthrate at the time. In other words, the increase was mostly due to migration.
The mass immigration was the result of economic development and modernization following Jewish immigration. The Arab immigrants came in search of a livelihood.
Tawfiq Bey al-Hourani, the Syrian governor of Hauran, said in 1934 that “over 30,000 Syrians invaded Palestine within a few months.”
Winston Churchill, on May 22, 1939, stated that Arab immigration during the Mandate period to Palestine was so great that their numbers grew by such a rate that even the Jews of the entire world could not match.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, President of the United States, said on May 17, 1939 that the immigration of Arabs to Palestine since 1921 was far greater than the immigration of Jews in recent times.
According to the British census in 1931, the Muslims in the country were not necessarily Arabs, judging from the languages they spoke: Afghan, Albanian, Arabic, Bosnian, Circassian, Kurdish, Persian, Sudanese and Turkish.
The Arabs themselves admit that Palestinian identity is forged as we showed in a previous article by Judith Bergman and as seen in the following video:
It is clear from this that Arabs migrated en masse to the area around the same time as Jews immigrated here. But there is another, very simple way to identify the origins of the Arabs, and that is according to their surnames. In the Arab communities, the surnames identify the tribe, or clans which one belongs to, a country or a region of their roots, and in some cases a profession.
It is important to stress that in the tribal culture the loyalty of each individual is first and foremost to their tribe and family. The western concept of nationalism is foreign to the Arabs’ tribal cultural. This is one of the reasons that with the fall of the central authority in Arab countries in the past decade, those nations have fallen into disarray.
Yasser Arafat’s full name for example, is Yasser Yusuf Arafat, Al-Qudwa, Al-Husseini. While he claimed he was born in Jerusalem, he was born in Cairo and his father’s family originates from the tribe of Al-Qudwa, which is in Syria. His mother, Husseini, was an Egyptian citizen, though the name exposes her roots in the region between Iraq and Saudi Arabia.
Here are some of the origins of common Arabic surnames one can easily find in any phone book in Israel, as well as on the map which reveals their location of origin (Since these names are all in Arabic, some might be spelled differently in other places):
Al-Turki – Turkey
Sultan – Turkey
Uthuman / Ottoman – Turkey
Al Masri – Egypt
Masrawa – Egypt
Al Tartir – Tartir village, Egypt
Bardawil – Lake and village Bardawil, Egypt
Tarabin – South-east Sinai (Bedouin), Egypt
Abu-Suta / Abu-Seeta – Tarabin tribe, Egypt
Sha’alan – Bedouin, Egypt
Fayumi – Al-Fayum village, Egypt
Al Bana – Egypt
Al-Baghdadi – Baghdad, Iraq
Abbas – Baghdad, Iraq
Zoabi – West Iraq
Al-Faruki – Iraq
Al-Tachriti – Iraq
Zabaide / Zubeidy – Iraq
Husseini / Hussein – Saudi Arabia (Hussein was the 4th Imam)
Tamimi – Saudi Arabia
Hejazi – Hejaz region (Red Sea shoreline) in Saudi Arabia
Al-Kurash / Al Kurashi – Saudi Arabia
Ta’amari – Saudi Arabia
Al-Halabi – Haleb region, North Syria
Al-Allawi – West Syria (shoreline)
Al-Hurani – Huran District, South Syria
Al-Qudwa – Syria
Nashashibi – Syria
Khamati – Syria
Lubnani – Lebanon
Sidawi – Sidon, Lebanon
Al-Surani – Sour-Tair, South Lebanon
Al-Yamani – Yemen
Al-Azad – Yemen
Hadadin – Yemen
Matar – Matar village. Yemen
Morad – Yemen
Khamadan – Yemen
Mugrabi – Maghreb, Morocco
Al-Araj – Morocco
Bushnak – Bosnia
Al-Shashani – Chechnya
Al-Jazir – Algiers
Al-Abid (Bedouin) – Sudan
Samahadna (Bedouin) – Sudan (still a matter of debate)
Al-Hamis – Bahrain
Zarqawi – Jordan
Tarabulsi – Tripoli, Lebanon
The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel
- Dec 6, 2009
- 77,717
- 4,169
- 1,815
The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel
What’s in a name? In the case of the Arabs, it tells you what their tribe and country of origin are. It also dispels the biggest fallacy the “Palestinians” would like you to believe.
The Arabs mark May the 15th as a day of remembrance for the catastrophe, the “Nakba” in Arabic, that befell them with the creation of the State of Israel. They claim the “indigenous” Arab inhabitants had to flee their “homeland” as a result. They conveniently fail to mention the reason for the “catastrophe” and where these supposed indigenous Arab inhabitants actually came from and when.
UN General Assembly resolution 181 of 1947 called for the partition of the British Mandate in Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab entities. The Jewish leadership accepted the resolution. The Arabs countries rejected it, which is their right. What they had no right to, was to declare war on the Jewish population in the area.
The armies of seven Arab countries set out to destroy the Jewish state, which they outnumbered a hundred to one. They also persecuted the Jewish citizens who lived in their own countries for hundreds of years, forcing them to leave and take refuge in the newly created State of Israel.
The Arab nations, together with the Arab population in the British Mandate area, sought to annihilate the Jews in the region and failed. The only catastrophe for them in this scenario was that they lost the war.
As in any war, people were uprooted and made to relocate. Nearly a million Jews – who were not even involved in the hostilities – were expelled from Arab countries; and over 600,000 Arabs from Israeli territory, many of whom were actually told to leave by the advancing Arab armies.
The “Mandate for Palestine” by the League of Nations (1922) defined the borders of the homeland of the Jewish people as the area between the Jordan river in the east, to the Mediterranean Sea in the west. This, as explained, due to a long historical and deep religious connection of the Jews to this land. It defined “Jews” as the people of the land which the San Remo commission (1920) called “Palestine”, using the old Roman title “Syria-Palestina”, given by Caesar Hadrian, in 132 a.d.
The Jews brought back the original name of “Israel” (ישראל) after almost 2000 years. To counter that, the Arabs adopted the Roman term “Palestine”, a word which is has no meaning in Arabic. Although the original founding document of the Palestine Liberation Organization terror group, the “PLO” said in 1964 (Article 24): “This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or in the Himmah Area”, the PLO emblem, as well as that of the Hamas, define a “Palestine” in the same exact borders the League of Nations used for the Land of Israel: from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.
They claimed indigenous status as “Palestinians” who lived in the area for generations. A review of history though, shows that from the time of the expulsion of the Jews by the Romans, the inhabitants of the area fluctuated.
From the time of the conquest of the land by the Muslim Arabs in 636 CE, the rulers of the land constantly shifted between Muslims, Crusaders, Arab Tribes among themselves and even the Mongols. This until 1517, with the Ottoman conquest that brought a measure of relative stability to the country, but also not for long.
The waves of conquests and wars; natural calamities such as earth quakes, harsh living conditions; as well as the periodic plundering of Arab Bedouin tribes from the desert, made the area undesirable. There are relatively few elements that can prove continuity of settlement in the Land of Israel whether Jew or Arab.
Thus, on the eve of the Zionist settlement, which began with the founding of Petah Tikva in 1878, the country was mostly deserted and abandoned. Its population was sparse and partly nomadic. Famous tourists who visited Israel at the time testified separately to this situation: They found a small rural Bedouin population living in muddy huts and described the place as a marshland, mostly uncultivated terrain, used as a grazing fields for goats and sheep. The local inhabitants were not the owners of the land. The owners were wealthy families from throughout the Ottoman Empire, who had no use for the land beyond the titles and honors it bestowed upon them.
With the migration of Jews to the Land of Israel between 1870 and 1947, the Arab population in the area grew by 270%, nearly three times that of Egypt, the Arab country with the highest natural birthrate at the time. In other words, the increase was mostly due to migration.
The mass immigration was the result of economic development and modernization following Jewish immigration. The Arab immigrants came in search of a livelihood.
Tawfiq Bey al-Hourani, the Syrian governor of Hauran, said in 1934 that “over 30,000 Syrians invaded Palestine within a few months.”
Winston Churchill, on May 22, 1939, stated that Arab immigration during the Mandate period to Palestine was so great that their numbers grew by such a rate that even the Jews of the entire world could not match.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, President of the United States, said on May 17, 1939 that the immigration of Arabs to Palestine since 1921 was far greater than the immigration of Jews in recent times.
According to the British census in 1931, the Muslims in the country were not necessarily Arabs, judging from the languages they spoke: Afghan, Albanian, Arabic, Bosnian, Circassian, Kurdish, Persian, Sudanese and Turkish.
The Arabs themselves admit that Palestinian identity is forged as we showed in a previous article by Judith Bergman and as seen in the following video:
It is clear from this that Arabs migrated en masse to the area around the same time as Jews immigrated here. But there is another, very simple way to identify the origins of the Arabs, and that is according to their surnames. In the Arab communities, the surnames identify the tribe, or clans which one belongs to, a country or a region of their roots, and in some cases a profession.
It is important to stress that in the tribal culture the loyalty of each individual is first and foremost to their tribe and family. The western concept of nationalism is foreign to the Arabs’ tribal cultural. This is one of the reasons that with the fall of the central authority in Arab countries in the past decade, those nations have fallen into disarray.
Yasser Arafat’s full name for example, is Yasser Yusuf Arafat, Al-Qudwa, Al-Husseini. While he claimed he was born in Jerusalem, he was born in Cairo and his father’s family originates from the tribe of Al-Qudwa, which is in Syria. His mother, Husseini, was an Egyptian citizen, though the name exposes her roots in the region between Iraq and Saudi Arabia.
Here are some of the origins of common Arabic surnames one can easily find in any phone book in Israel, as well as on the map which reveals their location of origin (Since these names are all in Arabic, some might be spelled differently in other places):
Al-Turki – Turkey
Sultan – Turkey
Uthuman / Ottoman – Turkey
Al Masri – Egypt
Masrawa – Egypt
Al Tartir – Tartir village, Egypt
Bardawil – Lake and village Bardawil, Egypt
Tarabin – South-east Sinai (Bedouin), Egypt
Abu-Suta / Abu-Seeta – Tarabin tribe, Egypt
Sha’alan – Bedouin, Egypt
Fayumi – Al-Fayum village, Egypt
Al Bana – Egypt
Al-Baghdadi – Baghdad, Iraq
Abbas – Baghdad, Iraq
Zoabi – West Iraq
Al-Faruki – Iraq
Al-Tachriti – Iraq
Zabaide / Zubeidy – Iraq
Husseini / Hussein – Saudi Arabia (Hussein was the 4th Imam)
Tamimi – Saudi Arabia
Hejazi – Hejaz region (Red Sea shoreline) in Saudi Arabia
Al-Kurash / Al Kurashi – Saudi Arabia
Ta’amari – Saudi Arabia
Al-Halabi – Haleb region, North Syria
Al-Allawi – West Syria (shoreline)
Al-Hurani – Huran District, South Syria
Al-Qudwa – Syria
Nashashibi – Syria
Khamati – Syria
Lubnani – Lebanon
Sidawi – Sidon, Lebanon
Al-Surani – Sour-Tair, South Lebanon
Al-Yamani – Yemen
Al-Azad – Yemen
Hadadin – Yemen
Matar – Matar village. Yemen
Morad – Yemen
Khamadan – Yemen
Mugrabi – Maghreb, Morocco
Al-Araj – Morocco
Bushnak – Bosnia
Al-Shashani – Chechnya
Al-Jazir – Algiers
Al-Abid (Bedouin) – Sudan
Samahadna (Bedouin) – Sudan (still a matter of debate)
Al-Hamis – Bahrain
Zarqawi – Jordan
Tarabulsi – Tripoli, Lebanon
The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel
An Israeli publication, of course.
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 21,143
- 4,483
- 290
The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel
What’s in a name? In the case of the Arabs, it tells you what their tribe and country of origin are. It also dispels the biggest fallacy the “Palestinians” would like you to believe.
The Arabs mark May the 15th as a day of remembrance for the catastrophe, the “Nakba” in Arabic, that befell them with the creation of the State of Israel. They claim the “indigenous” Arab inhabitants had to flee their “homeland” as a result. They conveniently fail to mention the reason for the “catastrophe” and where these supposed indigenous Arab inhabitants actually came from and when.
UN General Assembly resolution 181 of 1947 called for the partition of the British Mandate in Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab entities. The Jewish leadership accepted the resolution. The Arabs countries rejected it, which is their right. What they had no right to, was to declare war on the Jewish population in the area.
The armies of seven Arab countries set out to destroy the Jewish state, which they outnumbered a hundred to one. They also persecuted the Jewish citizens who lived in their own countries for hundreds of years, forcing them to leave and take refuge in the newly created State of Israel.
The Arab nations, together with the Arab population in the British Mandate area, sought to annihilate the Jews in the region and failed. The only catastrophe for them in this scenario was that they lost the war.
As in any war, people were uprooted and made to relocate. Nearly a million Jews – who were not even involved in the hostilities – were expelled from Arab countries; and over 600,000 Arabs from Israeli territory, many of whom were actually told to leave by the advancing Arab armies.
The “Mandate for Palestine” by the League of Nations (1922) defined the borders of the homeland of the Jewish people as the area between the Jordan river in the east, to the Mediterranean Sea in the west. This, as explained, due to a long historical and deep religious connection of the Jews to this land. It defined “Jews” as the people of the land which the San Remo commission (1920) called “Palestine”, using the old Roman title “Syria-Palestina”, given by Caesar Hadrian, in 132 a.d.
The Jews brought back the original name of “Israel” (ישראל) after almost 2000 years. To counter that, the Arabs adopted the Roman term “Palestine”, a word which is has no meaning in Arabic. Although the original founding document of the Palestine Liberation Organization terror group, the “PLO” said in 1964 (Article 24): “This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or in the Himmah Area”, the PLO emblem, as well as that of the Hamas, define a “Palestine” in the same exact borders the League of Nations used for the Land of Israel: from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.
They claimed indigenous status as “Palestinians” who lived in the area for generations. A review of history though, shows that from the time of the expulsion of the Jews by the Romans, the inhabitants of the area fluctuated.
From the time of the conquest of the land by the Muslim Arabs in 636 CE, the rulers of the land constantly shifted between Muslims, Crusaders, Arab Tribes among themselves and even the Mongols. This until 1517, with the Ottoman conquest that brought a measure of relative stability to the country, but also not for long.
The waves of conquests and wars; natural calamities such as earth quakes, harsh living conditions; as well as the periodic plundering of Arab Bedouin tribes from the desert, made the area undesirable. There are relatively few elements that can prove continuity of settlement in the Land of Israel whether Jew or Arab.
Thus, on the eve of the Zionist settlement, which began with the founding of Petah Tikva in 1878, the country was mostly deserted and abandoned. Its population was sparse and partly nomadic. Famous tourists who visited Israel at the time testified separately to this situation: They found a small rural Bedouin population living in muddy huts and described the place as a marshland, mostly uncultivated terrain, used as a grazing fields for goats and sheep. The local inhabitants were not the owners of the land. The owners were wealthy families from throughout the Ottoman Empire, who had no use for the land beyond the titles and honors it bestowed upon them.
With the migration of Jews to the Land of Israel between 1870 and 1947, the Arab population in the area grew by 270%, nearly three times that of Egypt, the Arab country with the highest natural birthrate at the time. In other words, the increase was mostly due to migration.
The mass immigration was the result of economic development and modernization following Jewish immigration. The Arab immigrants came in search of a livelihood.
Tawfiq Bey al-Hourani, the Syrian governor of Hauran, said in 1934 that “over 30,000 Syrians invaded Palestine within a few months.”
Winston Churchill, on May 22, 1939, stated that Arab immigration during the Mandate period to Palestine was so great that their numbers grew by such a rate that even the Jews of the entire world could not match.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, President of the United States, said on May 17, 1939 that the immigration of Arabs to Palestine since 1921 was far greater than the immigration of Jews in recent times.
According to the British census in 1931, the Muslims in the country were not necessarily Arabs, judging from the languages they spoke: Afghan, Albanian, Arabic, Bosnian, Circassian, Kurdish, Persian, Sudanese and Turkish.
The Arabs themselves admit that Palestinian identity is forged as we showed in a previous article by Judith Bergman and as seen in the following video:
It is clear from this that Arabs migrated en masse to the area around the same time as Jews immigrated here. But there is another, very simple way to identify the origins of the Arabs, and that is according to their surnames. In the Arab communities, the surnames identify the tribe, or clans which one belongs to, a country or a region of their roots, and in some cases a profession.
It is important to stress that in the tribal culture the loyalty of each individual is first and foremost to their tribe and family. The western concept of nationalism is foreign to the Arabs’ tribal cultural. This is one of the reasons that with the fall of the central authority in Arab countries in the past decade, those nations have fallen into disarray.
Yasser Arafat’s full name for example, is Yasser Yusuf Arafat, Al-Qudwa, Al-Husseini. While he claimed he was born in Jerusalem, he was born in Cairo and his father’s family originates from the tribe of Al-Qudwa, which is in Syria. His mother, Husseini, was an Egyptian citizen, though the name exposes her roots in the region between Iraq and Saudi Arabia.
Here are some of the origins of common Arabic surnames one can easily find in any phone book in Israel, as well as on the map which reveals their location of origin (Since these names are all in Arabic, some might be spelled differently in other places):
Al-Turki – Turkey
Sultan – Turkey
Uthuman / Ottoman – Turkey
Al Masri – Egypt
Masrawa – Egypt
Al Tartir – Tartir village, Egypt
Bardawil – Lake and village Bardawil, Egypt
Tarabin – South-east Sinai (Bedouin), Egypt
Abu-Suta / Abu-Seeta – Tarabin tribe, Egypt
Sha’alan – Bedouin, Egypt
Fayumi – Al-Fayum village, Egypt
Al Bana – Egypt
Al-Baghdadi – Baghdad, Iraq
Abbas – Baghdad, Iraq
Zoabi – West Iraq
Al-Faruki – Iraq
Al-Tachriti – Iraq
Zabaide / Zubeidy – Iraq
Husseini / Hussein – Saudi Arabia (Hussein was the 4th Imam)
Tamimi – Saudi Arabia
Hejazi – Hejaz region (Red Sea shoreline) in Saudi Arabia
Al-Kurash / Al Kurashi – Saudi Arabia
Ta’amari – Saudi Arabia
Al-Halabi – Haleb region, North Syria
Al-Allawi – West Syria (shoreline)
Al-Hurani – Huran District, South Syria
Al-Qudwa – Syria
Nashashibi – Syria
Khamati – Syria
Lubnani – Lebanon
Sidawi – Sidon, Lebanon
Al-Surani – Sour-Tair, South Lebanon
Al-Yamani – Yemen
Al-Azad – Yemen
Hadadin – Yemen
Matar – Matar village. Yemen
Morad – Yemen
Khamadan – Yemen
Mugrabi – Maghreb, Morocco
Al-Araj – Morocco
Bushnak – Bosnia
Al-Shashani – Chechnya
Al-Jazir – Algiers
Al-Abid (Bedouin) – Sudan
Samahadna (Bedouin) – Sudan (still a matter of debate)
Al-Hamis – Bahrain
Zarqawi – Jordan
Tarabulsi – Tripoli, Lebanon
The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel
An Israeli publication, of course.
And extensively detailed on facts.
Is that why you have nothing of substance to refute anything?
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 21,143
- 4,483
- 290
The Tamimi Tribe Baghdad 1939
Just to think that they are also the royal tribe of Qatar...
and the whole picture about so-called "Palestinians" becomes clear.
Just to think that they are also the royal tribe of Qatar...
and the whole picture about so-called "Palestinians" becomes clear.
Last edited:
Mindful
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #246
Palestine ceased to exist in 1948 when Israel won its war of independence, and Jordan (which is also part of historic Palestine) seized the West Bank and Egypt captured the Gaza Strip.
The use of the word “Palestine” is sometimes unclear. Is it referencing the Palestinian Authority, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, Israel, Gaza, or some combination of these areas? Depending on the interpretation, this could delegitimize the existence of Israel and the right of the Jewish people to self-determination in their homeland.
It is also problematic because it can imply that the conflict is over an area where the Palestinians were once sovereign. This feeds the narrative of Israel as an occupier. The Palestinians have never had a state, and had no interest in one during the Jordanian occupation.
Referring to the Israel-Palestine conflict also reinforces the idea that the dispute is over land. Often misleadingly described as a fight by two peoples over one land, the reality is more complex, as it involves politics, psychology, history, and religion. In recent years, the Islamization of the conflict has eclipsed other factors, as many Palestinians reject the historical Jewish connection to the land and will not contemplate Jews living on Islamic territory or ruling over Muslims.
The most pernicious aspect of the reference to “Palestine” is to create a false equivalency with the sovereign nation of Israel. Israel is a democracy that shares the values and interests of the West. Palestine does not exist; it may one day in the future, but for now, there is only the Palestinian Authority, which is autocratic, denies its people their basic rights, and does not share the values or interests of the West.
Losing the Semantic War on ‘Palestine’
The use of the word “Palestine” is sometimes unclear. Is it referencing the Palestinian Authority, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, Israel, Gaza, or some combination of these areas? Depending on the interpretation, this could delegitimize the existence of Israel and the right of the Jewish people to self-determination in their homeland.
It is also problematic because it can imply that the conflict is over an area where the Palestinians were once sovereign. This feeds the narrative of Israel as an occupier. The Palestinians have never had a state, and had no interest in one during the Jordanian occupation.
Referring to the Israel-Palestine conflict also reinforces the idea that the dispute is over land. Often misleadingly described as a fight by two peoples over one land, the reality is more complex, as it involves politics, psychology, history, and religion. In recent years, the Islamization of the conflict has eclipsed other factors, as many Palestinians reject the historical Jewish connection to the land and will not contemplate Jews living on Islamic territory or ruling over Muslims.
The most pernicious aspect of the reference to “Palestine” is to create a false equivalency with the sovereign nation of Israel. Israel is a democracy that shares the values and interests of the West. Palestine does not exist; it may one day in the future, but for now, there is only the Palestinian Authority, which is autocratic, denies its people their basic rights, and does not share the values or interests of the West.
Losing the Semantic War on ‘Palestine’
- Dec 6, 2009
- 77,717
- 4,169
- 1,815
The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel
What’s in a name? In the case of the Arabs, it tells you what their tribe and country of origin are. It also dispels the biggest fallacy the “Palestinians” would like you to believe.
The Arabs mark May the 15th as a day of remembrance for the catastrophe, the “Nakba” in Arabic, that befell them with the creation of the State of Israel. They claim the “indigenous” Arab inhabitants had to flee their “homeland” as a result. They conveniently fail to mention the reason for the “catastrophe” and where these supposed indigenous Arab inhabitants actually came from and when.
UN General Assembly resolution 181 of 1947 called for the partition of the British Mandate in Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab entities. The Jewish leadership accepted the resolution. The Arabs countries rejected it, which is their right. What they had no right to, was to declare war on the Jewish population in the area.
The armies of seven Arab countries set out to destroy the Jewish state, which they outnumbered a hundred to one. They also persecuted the Jewish citizens who lived in their own countries for hundreds of years, forcing them to leave and take refuge in the newly created State of Israel.
The Arab nations, together with the Arab population in the British Mandate area, sought to annihilate the Jews in the region and failed. The only catastrophe for them in this scenario was that they lost the war.
As in any war, people were uprooted and made to relocate. Nearly a million Jews – who were not even involved in the hostilities – were expelled from Arab countries; and over 600,000 Arabs from Israeli territory, many of whom were actually told to leave by the advancing Arab armies.
The “Mandate for Palestine” by the League of Nations (1922) defined the borders of the homeland of the Jewish people as the area between the Jordan river in the east, to the Mediterranean Sea in the west. This, as explained, due to a long historical and deep religious connection of the Jews to this land. It defined “Jews” as the people of the land which the San Remo commission (1920) called “Palestine”, using the old Roman title “Syria-Palestina”, given by Caesar Hadrian, in 132 a.d.
The Jews brought back the original name of “Israel” (ישראל) after almost 2000 years. To counter that, the Arabs adopted the Roman term “Palestine”, a word which is has no meaning in Arabic. Although the original founding document of the Palestine Liberation Organization terror group, the “PLO” said in 1964 (Article 24): “This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or in the Himmah Area”, the PLO emblem, as well as that of the Hamas, define a “Palestine” in the same exact borders the League of Nations used for the Land of Israel: from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.
They claimed indigenous status as “Palestinians” who lived in the area for generations. A review of history though, shows that from the time of the expulsion of the Jews by the Romans, the inhabitants of the area fluctuated.
From the time of the conquest of the land by the Muslim Arabs in 636 CE, the rulers of the land constantly shifted between Muslims, Crusaders, Arab Tribes among themselves and even the Mongols. This until 1517, with the Ottoman conquest that brought a measure of relative stability to the country, but also not for long.
The waves of conquests and wars; natural calamities such as earth quakes, harsh living conditions; as well as the periodic plundering of Arab Bedouin tribes from the desert, made the area undesirable. There are relatively few elements that can prove continuity of settlement in the Land of Israel whether Jew or Arab.
Thus, on the eve of the Zionist settlement, which began with the founding of Petah Tikva in 1878, the country was mostly deserted and abandoned. Its population was sparse and partly nomadic. Famous tourists who visited Israel at the time testified separately to this situation: They found a small rural Bedouin population living in muddy huts and described the place as a marshland, mostly uncultivated terrain, used as a grazing fields for goats and sheep. The local inhabitants were not the owners of the land. The owners were wealthy families from throughout the Ottoman Empire, who had no use for the land beyond the titles and honors it bestowed upon them.
With the migration of Jews to the Land of Israel between 1870 and 1947, the Arab population in the area grew by 270%, nearly three times that of Egypt, the Arab country with the highest natural birthrate at the time. In other words, the increase was mostly due to migration.
The mass immigration was the result of economic development and modernization following Jewish immigration. The Arab immigrants came in search of a livelihood.
Tawfiq Bey al-Hourani, the Syrian governor of Hauran, said in 1934 that “over 30,000 Syrians invaded Palestine within a few months.”
Winston Churchill, on May 22, 1939, stated that Arab immigration during the Mandate period to Palestine was so great that their numbers grew by such a rate that even the Jews of the entire world could not match.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, President of the United States, said on May 17, 1939 that the immigration of Arabs to Palestine since 1921 was far greater than the immigration of Jews in recent times.
According to the British census in 1931, the Muslims in the country were not necessarily Arabs, judging from the languages they spoke: Afghan, Albanian, Arabic, Bosnian, Circassian, Kurdish, Persian, Sudanese and Turkish.
The Arabs themselves admit that Palestinian identity is forged as we showed in a previous article by Judith Bergman and as seen in the following video:
It is clear from this that Arabs migrated en masse to the area around the same time as Jews immigrated here. But there is another, very simple way to identify the origins of the Arabs, and that is according to their surnames. In the Arab communities, the surnames identify the tribe, or clans which one belongs to, a country or a region of their roots, and in some cases a profession.
It is important to stress that in the tribal culture the loyalty of each individual is first and foremost to their tribe and family. The western concept of nationalism is foreign to the Arabs’ tribal cultural. This is one of the reasons that with the fall of the central authority in Arab countries in the past decade, those nations have fallen into disarray.
Yasser Arafat’s full name for example, is Yasser Yusuf Arafat, Al-Qudwa, Al-Husseini. While he claimed he was born in Jerusalem, he was born in Cairo and his father’s family originates from the tribe of Al-Qudwa, which is in Syria. His mother, Husseini, was an Egyptian citizen, though the name exposes her roots in the region between Iraq and Saudi Arabia.
Here are some of the origins of common Arabic surnames one can easily find in any phone book in Israel, as well as on the map which reveals their location of origin (Since these names are all in Arabic, some might be spelled differently in other places):
Al-Turki – Turkey
Sultan – Turkey
Uthuman / Ottoman – Turkey
Al Masri – Egypt
Masrawa – Egypt
Al Tartir – Tartir village, Egypt
Bardawil – Lake and village Bardawil, Egypt
Tarabin – South-east Sinai (Bedouin), Egypt
Abu-Suta / Abu-Seeta – Tarabin tribe, Egypt
Sha’alan – Bedouin, Egypt
Fayumi – Al-Fayum village, Egypt
Al Bana – Egypt
Al-Baghdadi – Baghdad, Iraq
Abbas – Baghdad, Iraq
Zoabi – West Iraq
Al-Faruki – Iraq
Al-Tachriti – Iraq
Zabaide / Zubeidy – Iraq
Husseini / Hussein – Saudi Arabia (Hussein was the 4th Imam)
Tamimi – Saudi Arabia
Hejazi – Hejaz region (Red Sea shoreline) in Saudi Arabia
Al-Kurash / Al Kurashi – Saudi Arabia
Ta’amari – Saudi Arabia
Al-Halabi – Haleb region, North Syria
Al-Allawi – West Syria (shoreline)
Al-Hurani – Huran District, South Syria
Al-Qudwa – Syria
Nashashibi – Syria
Khamati – Syria
Lubnani – Lebanon
Sidawi – Sidon, Lebanon
Al-Surani – Sour-Tair, South Lebanon
Al-Yamani – Yemen
Al-Azad – Yemen
Hadadin – Yemen
Matar – Matar village. Yemen
Morad – Yemen
Khamadan – Yemen
Mugrabi – Maghreb, Morocco
Al-Araj – Morocco
Bushnak – Bosnia
Al-Shashani – Chechnya
Al-Jazir – Algiers
Al-Abid (Bedouin) – Sudan
Samahadna (Bedouin) – Sudan (still a matter of debate)
Al-Hamis – Bahrain
Zarqawi – Jordan
Tarabulsi – Tripoli, Lebanon
The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel
The "Mandate" was not a land/border treaty.
The rulers changed but there is nothing saying that the people changed.
ForeverYoung436
Gold Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 6,050
- 1,226
- 245
- Thread starter
- #248
The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel
What’s in a name? In the case of the Arabs, it tells you what their tribe and country of origin are. It also dispels the biggest fallacy the “Palestinians” would like you to believe.
The Arabs mark May the 15th as a day of remembrance for the catastrophe, the “Nakba” in Arabic, that befell them with the creation of the State of Israel. They claim the “indigenous” Arab inhabitants had to flee their “homeland” as a result. They conveniently fail to mention the reason for the “catastrophe” and where these supposed indigenous Arab inhabitants actually came from and when.
UN General Assembly resolution 181 of 1947 called for the partition of the British Mandate in Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab entities. The Jewish leadership accepted the resolution. The Arabs countries rejected it, which is their right. What they had no right to, was to declare war on the Jewish population in the area.
The armies of seven Arab countries set out to destroy the Jewish state, which they outnumbered a hundred to one. They also persecuted the Jewish citizens who lived in their own countries for hundreds of years, forcing them to leave and take refuge in the newly created State of Israel.
The Arab nations, together with the Arab population in the British Mandate area, sought to annihilate the Jews in the region and failed. The only catastrophe for them in this scenario was that they lost the war.
As in any war, people were uprooted and made to relocate. Nearly a million Jews – who were not even involved in the hostilities – were expelled from Arab countries; and over 600,000 Arabs from Israeli territory, many of whom were actually told to leave by the advancing Arab armies.
The “Mandate for Palestine” by the League of Nations (1922) defined the borders of the homeland of the Jewish people as the area between the Jordan river in the east, to the Mediterranean Sea in the west. This, as explained, due to a long historical and deep religious connection of the Jews to this land. It defined “Jews” as the people of the land which the San Remo commission (1920) called “Palestine”, using the old Roman title “Syria-Palestina”, given by Caesar Hadrian, in 132 a.d.
The Jews brought back the original name of “Israel” (ישראל) after almost 2000 years. To counter that, the Arabs adopted the Roman term “Palestine”, a word which is has no meaning in Arabic. Although the original founding document of the Palestine Liberation Organization terror group, the “PLO” said in 1964 (Article 24): “This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or in the Himmah Area”, the PLO emblem, as well as that of the Hamas, define a “Palestine” in the same exact borders the League of Nations used for the Land of Israel: from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.
They claimed indigenous status as “Palestinians” who lived in the area for generations. A review of history though, shows that from the time of the expulsion of the Jews by the Romans, the inhabitants of the area fluctuated.
From the time of the conquest of the land by the Muslim Arabs in 636 CE, the rulers of the land constantly shifted between Muslims, Crusaders, Arab Tribes among themselves and even the Mongols. This until 1517, with the Ottoman conquest that brought a measure of relative stability to the country, but also not for long.
The waves of conquests and wars; natural calamities such as earth quakes, harsh living conditions; as well as the periodic plundering of Arab Bedouin tribes from the desert, made the area undesirable. There are relatively few elements that can prove continuity of settlement in the Land of Israel whether Jew or Arab.
Thus, on the eve of the Zionist settlement, which began with the founding of Petah Tikva in 1878, the country was mostly deserted and abandoned. Its population was sparse and partly nomadic. Famous tourists who visited Israel at the time testified separately to this situation: They found a small rural Bedouin population living in muddy huts and described the place as a marshland, mostly uncultivated terrain, used as a grazing fields for goats and sheep. The local inhabitants were not the owners of the land. The owners were wealthy families from throughout the Ottoman Empire, who had no use for the land beyond the titles and honors it bestowed upon them.
With the migration of Jews to the Land of Israel between 1870 and 1947, the Arab population in the area grew by 270%, nearly three times that of Egypt, the Arab country with the highest natural birthrate at the time. In other words, the increase was mostly due to migration.
The mass immigration was the result of economic development and modernization following Jewish immigration. The Arab immigrants came in search of a livelihood.
Tawfiq Bey al-Hourani, the Syrian governor of Hauran, said in 1934 that “over 30,000 Syrians invaded Palestine within a few months.”
Winston Churchill, on May 22, 1939, stated that Arab immigration during the Mandate period to Palestine was so great that their numbers grew by such a rate that even the Jews of the entire world could not match.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, President of the United States, said on May 17, 1939 that the immigration of Arabs to Palestine since 1921 was far greater than the immigration of Jews in recent times.
According to the British census in 1931, the Muslims in the country were not necessarily Arabs, judging from the languages they spoke: Afghan, Albanian, Arabic, Bosnian, Circassian, Kurdish, Persian, Sudanese and Turkish.
The Arabs themselves admit that Palestinian identity is forged as we showed in a previous article by Judith Bergman and as seen in the following video:
It is clear from this that Arabs migrated en masse to the area around the same time as Jews immigrated here. But there is another, very simple way to identify the origins of the Arabs, and that is according to their surnames. In the Arab communities, the surnames identify the tribe, or clans which one belongs to, a country or a region of their roots, and in some cases a profession.
It is important to stress that in the tribal culture the loyalty of each individual is first and foremost to their tribe and family. The western concept of nationalism is foreign to the Arabs’ tribal cultural. This is one of the reasons that with the fall of the central authority in Arab countries in the past decade, those nations have fallen into disarray.
Yasser Arafat’s full name for example, is Yasser Yusuf Arafat, Al-Qudwa, Al-Husseini. While he claimed he was born in Jerusalem, he was born in Cairo and his father’s family originates from the tribe of Al-Qudwa, which is in Syria. His mother, Husseini, was an Egyptian citizen, though the name exposes her roots in the region between Iraq and Saudi Arabia.
Here are some of the origins of common Arabic surnames one can easily find in any phone book in Israel, as well as on the map which reveals their location of origin (Since these names are all in Arabic, some might be spelled differently in other places):
Al-Turki – Turkey
Sultan – Turkey
Uthuman / Ottoman – Turkey
Al Masri – Egypt
Masrawa – Egypt
Al Tartir – Tartir village, Egypt
Bardawil – Lake and village Bardawil, Egypt
Tarabin – South-east Sinai (Bedouin), Egypt
Abu-Suta / Abu-Seeta – Tarabin tribe, Egypt
Sha’alan – Bedouin, Egypt
Fayumi – Al-Fayum village, Egypt
Al Bana – Egypt
Al-Baghdadi – Baghdad, Iraq
Abbas – Baghdad, Iraq
Zoabi – West Iraq
Al-Faruki – Iraq
Al-Tachriti – Iraq
Zabaide / Zubeidy – Iraq
Husseini / Hussein – Saudi Arabia (Hussein was the 4th Imam)
Tamimi – Saudi Arabia
Hejazi – Hejaz region (Red Sea shoreline) in Saudi Arabia
Al-Kurash / Al Kurashi – Saudi Arabia
Ta’amari – Saudi Arabia
Al-Halabi – Haleb region, North Syria
Al-Allawi – West Syria (shoreline)
Al-Hurani – Huran District, South Syria
Al-Qudwa – Syria
Nashashibi – Syria
Khamati – Syria
Lubnani – Lebanon
Sidawi – Sidon, Lebanon
Al-Surani – Sour-Tair, South Lebanon
Al-Yamani – Yemen
Al-Azad – Yemen
Hadadin – Yemen
Matar – Matar village. Yemen
Morad – Yemen
Khamadan – Yemen
Mugrabi – Maghreb, Morocco
Al-Araj – Morocco
Bushnak – Bosnia
Al-Shashani – Chechnya
Al-Jazir – Algiers
Al-Abid (Bedouin) – Sudan
Samahadna (Bedouin) – Sudan (still a matter of debate)
Al-Hamis – Bahrain
Zarqawi – Jordan
Tarabulsi – Tripoli, Lebanon
The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel
The "Mandate" was not a land/border treaty.
The rulers changed but there is nothing saying that the people changed.
Didn't English Pilgrims come over on the Mayflower? Didn't the Spanish conquistadors bring Spanish and Portuguese immigrants with them? They turned South America into Latin America. Churchill said the economic prosperity brought about by the Zionists caused a mass influx of immigrants from Arab countries seeking employment. This can be seen by the surnames of the so-called "Palestinians", which reflect their countries of origin. Hate to break it to ya, but they ain't Canaanites, lol.
RE: Are the Palestinians a real people?
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
You try and pull this crap all the time.
The authority for the Mandate and be traced directly back to the victory of the Allied Powers over the Axis Powers at the end of the Great War (WWI). You can quibble all you want, but at the end of the day, the Arab Palestinians had no say in the matter of sovereignty or the direct partitioning of the territories in the Middle East, formerly under the sovereignty of the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic.
At the conclusion of hostilities and in agreement with the terms set between the Allied Powers and the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic → the future of the territories → being settled or to be settled by the parties to the treaty were at the discretion of the Allied Powers (not the Arab Palestinians or any Arab contingent for that matter).
The → future of the territories → cast by the laws and documentation that is written, what has been written, are that which defines the status of the territories in question, were largely driven - based upon what the Allied Powers have decided. What decisions going into the future will be an outcome → based upon what the Israelis will decide - moving forward. There is not one essential legal instrument since the Armistice of Mudros (Ottoman surrender), in which the Arab Palestinians contributed that lead to the creation of any meaningful self-governing institution. This was by their own string of decisions and policy that armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine; there being no solution for the Question of Palestine → except through Jihad
Most Respectfully,
R
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
You try and pull this crap all the time.
(COMMENT)
The authority for the Mandate and be traced directly back to the victory of the Allied Powers over the Axis Powers at the end of the Great War (WWI). You can quibble all you want, but at the end of the day, the Arab Palestinians had no say in the matter of sovereignty or the direct partitioning of the territories in the Middle East, formerly under the sovereignty of the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic.
At the conclusion of hostilities and in agreement with the terms set between the Allied Powers and the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic → the future of the territories → being settled or to be settled by the parties to the treaty were at the discretion of the Allied Powers (not the Arab Palestinians or any Arab contingent for that matter).
The → future of the territories → cast by the laws and documentation that is written, what has been written, are that which defines the status of the territories in question, were largely driven - based upon what the Allied Powers have decided. What decisions going into the future will be an outcome → based upon what the Israelis will decide - moving forward. There is not one essential legal instrument since the Armistice of Mudros (Ottoman surrender), in which the Arab Palestinians contributed that lead to the creation of any meaningful self-governing institution. This was by their own string of decisions and policy that armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine; there being no solution for the Question of Palestine → except through Jihad
Most Respectfully,
R
- Dec 6, 2009
- 77,717
- 4,169
- 1,815
Indeed, the Palestinians have always been jerked around by foreign assholes. That does not negate their rights as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.RE: Are the Palestinians a real people?
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
You try and pull this crap all the time.
(COMMENT)
The authority for the Mandate and be traced directly back to the victory of the Allied Powers over the Axis Powers at the end of the Great War (WWI). You can quibble all you want, but at the end of the day, the Arab Palestinians had no say in the matter of sovereignty or the direct partitioning of the territories in the Middle East, formerly under the sovereignty of the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic.
At the conclusion of hostilities and in agreement with the terms set between the Allied Powers and the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic → the future of the territories → being settled or to be settled by the parties to the treaty were at the discretion of the Allied Powers (not the Arab Palestinians or any Arab contingent for that matter).
The → future of the territories → cast by the laws and documentation that is written, what has been written, are that which defines the status of the territories in question, were largely driven - based upon what the Allied Powers have decided. What decisions going into the future will be an outcome → based upon what the Israelis will decide - moving forward. There is not one essential legal instrument since the Armistice of Mudros (Ottoman surrender), in which the Arab Palestinians contributed that lead to the creation of any meaningful self-governing institution. This was by their own string of decisions and policy that armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine; there being no solution for the Question of Palestine → except through Jihad
Most Respectfully,
R
Indeed, the Palestinians have always been jerked around by foreign assholes. That does not negate their rights as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.RE: Are the Palestinians a real people?
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
You try and pull this crap all the time.
(COMMENT)
The authority for the Mandate and be traced directly back to the victory of the Allied Powers over the Axis Powers at the end of the Great War (WWI). You can quibble all you want, but at the end of the day, the Arab Palestinians had no say in the matter of sovereignty or the direct partitioning of the territories in the Middle East, formerly under the sovereignty of the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic.
At the conclusion of hostilities and in agreement with the terms set between the Allied Powers and the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic → the future of the territories → being settled or to be settled by the parties to the treaty were at the discretion of the Allied Powers (not the Arab Palestinians or any Arab contingent for that matter).
The → future of the territories → cast by the laws and documentation that is written, what has been written, are that which defines the status of the territories in question, were largely driven - based upon what the Allied Powers have decided. What decisions going into the future will be an outcome → based upon what the Israelis will decide - moving forward. There is not one essential legal instrument since the Armistice of Mudros (Ottoman surrender), in which the Arab Palestinians contributed that lead to the creation of any meaningful self-governing institution. This was by their own string of decisions and policy that armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine; there being no solution for the Question of Palestine → except through Jihad
Most Respectfully,
R
Indeed, UN opinions are just opinions.
RE: Are the Palestinians a real people?
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
It is one thing to say you have a "right."
It is altogether a different matter to attempt to force-feed that right in a manner to compel others to do something.
You can have all the affirmations you want. An affirmation does not require the Israelis to take any action, not in their best interest.
Most Respectfully,
R
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
It is one thing to say you have a "right."
(COMMENT)
It is altogether a different matter to attempt to force-feed that right in a manner to compel others to do something.
You can have all the affirmations you want. An affirmation does not require the Israelis to take any action, not in their best interest.
Most Respectfully,
R
- Dec 6, 2009
- 77,717
- 4,169
- 1,815
Nobody has to do something for people to exercise their rights.RE: Are the Palestinians a real people?
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
It is one thing to say you have a "right."
(COMMENT)
It is altogether a different matter to attempt to force-feed that right in a manner to compel others to do something.
You can have all the affirmations you want. An affirmation does not require the Israelis to take any action, not in their best interest.
Most Respectfully,
R
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 21,143
- 4,483
- 290
The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel
What’s in a name? In the case of the Arabs, it tells you what their tribe and country of origin are. It also dispels the biggest fallacy the “Palestinians” would like you to believe.
The Arabs mark May the 15th as a day of remembrance for the catastrophe, the “Nakba” in Arabic, that befell them with the creation of the State of Israel. They claim the “indigenous” Arab inhabitants had to flee their “homeland” as a result. They conveniently fail to mention the reason for the “catastrophe” and where these supposed indigenous Arab inhabitants actually came from and when.
UN General Assembly resolution 181 of 1947 called for the partition of the British Mandate in Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab entities. The Jewish leadership accepted the resolution. The Arabs countries rejected it, which is their right. What they had no right to, was to declare war on the Jewish population in the area.
The armies of seven Arab countries set out to destroy the Jewish state, which they outnumbered a hundred to one. They also persecuted the Jewish citizens who lived in their own countries for hundreds of years, forcing them to leave and take refuge in the newly created State of Israel.
The Arab nations, together with the Arab population in the British Mandate area, sought to annihilate the Jews in the region and failed. The only catastrophe for them in this scenario was that they lost the war.
As in any war, people were uprooted and made to relocate. Nearly a million Jews – who were not even involved in the hostilities – were expelled from Arab countries; and over 600,000 Arabs from Israeli territory, many of whom were actually told to leave by the advancing Arab armies.
The “Mandate for Palestine” by the League of Nations (1922) defined the borders of the homeland of the Jewish people as the area between the Jordan river in the east, to the Mediterranean Sea in the west. This, as explained, due to a long historical and deep religious connection of the Jews to this land. It defined “Jews” as the people of the land which the San Remo commission (1920) called “Palestine”, using the old Roman title “Syria-Palestina”, given by Caesar Hadrian, in 132 a.d.
The Jews brought back the original name of “Israel” (ישראל) after almost 2000 years. To counter that, the Arabs adopted the Roman term “Palestine”, a word which is has no meaning in Arabic. Although the original founding document of the Palestine Liberation Organization terror group, the “PLO” said in 1964 (Article 24): “This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or in the Himmah Area”, the PLO emblem, as well as that of the Hamas, define a “Palestine” in the same exact borders the League of Nations used for the Land of Israel: from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.
They claimed indigenous status as “Palestinians” who lived in the area for generations. A review of history though, shows that from the time of the expulsion of the Jews by the Romans, the inhabitants of the area fluctuated.
From the time of the conquest of the land by the Muslim Arabs in 636 CE, the rulers of the land constantly shifted between Muslims, Crusaders, Arab Tribes among themselves and even the Mongols. This until 1517, with the Ottoman conquest that brought a measure of relative stability to the country, but also not for long.
The waves of conquests and wars; natural calamities such as earth quakes, harsh living conditions; as well as the periodic plundering of Arab Bedouin tribes from the desert, made the area undesirable. There are relatively few elements that can prove continuity of settlement in the Land of Israel whether Jew or Arab.
Thus, on the eve of the Zionist settlement, which began with the founding of Petah Tikva in 1878, the country was mostly deserted and abandoned. Its population was sparse and partly nomadic. Famous tourists who visited Israel at the time testified separately to this situation: They found a small rural Bedouin population living in muddy huts and described the place as a marshland, mostly uncultivated terrain, used as a grazing fields for goats and sheep. The local inhabitants were not the owners of the land. The owners were wealthy families from throughout the Ottoman Empire, who had no use for the land beyond the titles and honors it bestowed upon them.
With the migration of Jews to the Land of Israel between 1870 and 1947, the Arab population in the area grew by 270%, nearly three times that of Egypt, the Arab country with the highest natural birthrate at the time. In other words, the increase was mostly due to migration.
The mass immigration was the result of economic development and modernization following Jewish immigration. The Arab immigrants came in search of a livelihood.
Tawfiq Bey al-Hourani, the Syrian governor of Hauran, said in 1934 that “over 30,000 Syrians invaded Palestine within a few months.”
Winston Churchill, on May 22, 1939, stated that Arab immigration during the Mandate period to Palestine was so great that their numbers grew by such a rate that even the Jews of the entire world could not match.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, President of the United States, said on May 17, 1939 that the immigration of Arabs to Palestine since 1921 was far greater than the immigration of Jews in recent times.
According to the British census in 1931, the Muslims in the country were not necessarily Arabs, judging from the languages they spoke: Afghan, Albanian, Arabic, Bosnian, Circassian, Kurdish, Persian, Sudanese and Turkish.
The Arabs themselves admit that Palestinian identity is forged as we showed in a previous article by Judith Bergman and as seen in the following video:
It is clear from this that Arabs migrated en masse to the area around the same time as Jews immigrated here. But there is another, very simple way to identify the origins of the Arabs, and that is according to their surnames. In the Arab communities, the surnames identify the tribe, or clans which one belongs to, a country or a region of their roots, and in some cases a profession.
It is important to stress that in the tribal culture the loyalty of each individual is first and foremost to their tribe and family. The western concept of nationalism is foreign to the Arabs’ tribal cultural. This is one of the reasons that with the fall of the central authority in Arab countries in the past decade, those nations have fallen into disarray.
Yasser Arafat’s full name for example, is Yasser Yusuf Arafat, Al-Qudwa, Al-Husseini. While he claimed he was born in Jerusalem, he was born in Cairo and his father’s family originates from the tribe of Al-Qudwa, which is in Syria. His mother, Husseini, was an Egyptian citizen, though the name exposes her roots in the region between Iraq and Saudi Arabia.
Here are some of the origins of common Arabic surnames one can easily find in any phone book in Israel, as well as on the map which reveals their location of origin (Since these names are all in Arabic, some might be spelled differently in other places):
Al-Turki – Turkey
Sultan – Turkey
Uthuman / Ottoman – Turkey
Al Masri – Egypt
Masrawa – Egypt
Al Tartir – Tartir village, Egypt
Bardawil – Lake and village Bardawil, Egypt
Tarabin – South-east Sinai (Bedouin), Egypt
Abu-Suta / Abu-Seeta – Tarabin tribe, Egypt
Sha’alan – Bedouin, Egypt
Fayumi – Al-Fayum village, Egypt
Al Bana – Egypt
Al-Baghdadi – Baghdad, Iraq
Abbas – Baghdad, Iraq
Zoabi – West Iraq
Al-Faruki – Iraq
Al-Tachriti – Iraq
Zabaide / Zubeidy – Iraq
Husseini / Hussein – Saudi Arabia (Hussein was the 4th Imam)
Tamimi – Saudi Arabia
Hejazi – Hejaz region (Red Sea shoreline) in Saudi Arabia
Al-Kurash / Al Kurashi – Saudi Arabia
Ta’amari – Saudi Arabia
Al-Halabi – Haleb region, North Syria
Al-Allawi – West Syria (shoreline)
Al-Hurani – Huran District, South Syria
Al-Qudwa – Syria
Nashashibi – Syria
Khamati – Syria
Lubnani – Lebanon
Sidawi – Sidon, Lebanon
Al-Surani – Sour-Tair, South Lebanon
Al-Yamani – Yemen
Al-Azad – Yemen
Hadadin – Yemen
Matar – Matar village. Yemen
Morad – Yemen
Khamadan – Yemen
Mugrabi – Maghreb, Morocco
Al-Araj – Morocco
Bushnak – Bosnia
Al-Shashani – Chechnya
Al-Jazir – Algiers
Al-Abid (Bedouin) – Sudan
Samahadna (Bedouin) – Sudan (still a matter of debate)
Al-Hamis – Bahrain
Zarqawi – Jordan
Tarabulsi – Tripoli, Lebanon
The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel
The "Mandate" was not a land/border treaty.
The rulers changed but there is nothing saying that the people changed.
Like having names of foreign places and countries as their surnames,
and having to rename the original names of local towns
because they cannot pronounce them.
Or their own confirmation that half of so called "Palestinians"
are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis.
This nothing?
Last edited:
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 21,143
- 4,483
- 290
Indeed, the Palestinians have always been jerked around by foreign assholes. That does not negate their rights as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.RE: Are the Palestinians a real people?
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
You try and pull this crap all the time.
(COMMENT)
The authority for the Mandate and be traced directly back to the victory of the Allied Powers over the Axis Powers at the end of the Great War (WWI). You can quibble all you want, but at the end of the day, the Arab Palestinians had no say in the matter of sovereignty or the direct partitioning of the territories in the Middle East, formerly under the sovereignty of the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic.
At the conclusion of hostilities and in agreement with the terms set between the Allied Powers and the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic → the future of the territories → being settled or to be settled by the parties to the treaty were at the discretion of the Allied Powers (not the Arab Palestinians or any Arab contingent for that matter).
The → future of the territories → cast by the laws and documentation that is written, what has been written, are that which defines the status of the territories in question, were largely driven - based upon what the Allied Powers have decided. What decisions going into the future will be an outcome → based upon what the Israelis will decide - moving forward. There is not one essential legal instrument since the Armistice of Mudros (Ottoman surrender), in which the Arab Palestinians contributed that lead to the creation of any meaningful self-governing institution. This was by their own string of decisions and policy that armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine; there being no solution for the Question of Palestine → except through Jihad
Most Respectfully,
R
Indeed, "the Palestinians" are a bunch of foreigner invader themselves,
that's exactly what the word means:
Couldn't be more in your face.
Last edited:
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 21,143
- 4,483
- 290
Just to name a few...
"The Ayyubi families of Palestine have relations in the Kurdistan Region.
We would like to be connected with other Kurds from Kurdistan.
Their numbers have increased to 70,000 families in Khalil (Hebron) city"
Kurds of Palestine hoping to connect with home
"The Ayyubi families of Palestine have relations in the Kurdistan Region.
We would like to be connected with other Kurds from Kurdistan.
Their numbers have increased to 70,000 families in Khalil (Hebron) city"
Kurds of Palestine hoping to connect with home
Last edited:
ForeverYoung436
Gold Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 6,050
- 1,226
- 245
- Thread starter
- #257
Well, there's Tinmore's girlfriend, Shirley Temper, the one who goes around beating soldiers (with them having almost superhuman restraint in not slapping her back). She has blond hair and blue eyes--not exactly a Middle Eastern look. She's probably descended from Bosnian Muslims--and not from the Canaanites.
RE: Are the Palestinians a real people?
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
John Rawls, often described as the most important political philosopher of the 20th century, set ideas in motion that are the bedrock in the Principles of justice. This theory establishes two principles of justice from the original position.
◈ The first of these expresses, that 'Basic' liberty includes freedoms of conscience, association and expression as well as democratic rights.
◈ The second principle of equality sets the guarantee of liberties that represent meaningful options for all in society and ensure distributive justice.
These insights approach and include a personal property right, slightly different from what is generally understood. It is defended in terms of "moral capacities" and "self-respect," rather than an appeal to a natural right (inherent rights) of self-ownership.
In his book, • A Theory of Justice • Rawls formulated a comprehensive theory of international politics with the publication of • The Law of Peoples.• He claimed there that "well-ordered" peoples could be either "liberal" or "decent". Rawls's basic distinction in international politics is that his preferred emphasis on a society of peoples is separate from the more conventional and historical discussion of international politics as based on relationships between states (as in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States A/RES/25/2625).
You are correct. But only in the sense of "action: (See; Negative vs. Positive Rights)
In the discussion of "Rights" relative to the Question of Palestine, we have to be careful... "Negative and positive rights frequently conflict because carrying out the duties conferred by positive rights often entails infringing upon negative rights." (Globalization101 > Issues in Depth > Human Rights > Negative vs. Positive Rights) And the State of Israel will or will not take action based upon the best interest of Israel; just like most countries.
We've discussed this before when you raise these issues of "rights." IF Israel has effective control of territory (1967), before the Independence of the Arab Palestinian People (1988); and the Arab Palestinians demand that Israel relinquish its control over that territory in favor of the Arab Palestinian, THEN the Arab Palestinians are demanding and "action." But IF, as you say, "• Nobody has to do something for people to exercise their rights •" THEN the demand becomes contingent based on the outcome of an Arab Palestinian appeal to the Israels on the natural right (inherent rights) of self-ownership as determined by the Israelis.
Since it is the policy of the Arab Palestinian that armed conflict is the only viable solution, there is no likelihood that Israel will capitulate.
Most Respectfully,
R
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
John Rawls, often described as the most important political philosopher of the 20th century, set ideas in motion that are the bedrock in the Principles of justice. This theory establishes two principles of justice from the original position.
◈ The first of these expresses, that 'Basic' liberty includes freedoms of conscience, association and expression as well as democratic rights.
◈ The second principle of equality sets the guarantee of liberties that represent meaningful options for all in society and ensure distributive justice.
These insights approach and include a personal property right, slightly different from what is generally understood. It is defended in terms of "moral capacities" and "self-respect," rather than an appeal to a natural right (inherent rights) of self-ownership.
(COMMENT)
In his book, • A Theory of Justice • Rawls formulated a comprehensive theory of international politics with the publication of • The Law of Peoples.• He claimed there that "well-ordered" peoples could be either "liberal" or "decent". Rawls's basic distinction in international politics is that his preferred emphasis on a society of peoples is separate from the more conventional and historical discussion of international politics as based on relationships between states (as in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States A/RES/25/2625).
You are correct. But only in the sense of "action: (See; Negative vs. Positive Rights)
◈ A negative right is a right not to be subjected to an action of another person or group; negative rights permit or oblige inaction.
◈ A positive right is a right to be subjected to an action or another person or group; positive rights permit or oblige action.
◈ A positive right is a right to be subjected to an action or another person or group; positive rights permit or oblige action.
In the discussion of "Rights" relative to the Question of Palestine, we have to be careful... "Negative and positive rights frequently conflict because carrying out the duties conferred by positive rights often entails infringing upon negative rights." (Globalization101 > Issues in Depth > Human Rights > Negative vs. Positive Rights) And the State of Israel will or will not take action based upon the best interest of Israel; just like most countries.
We've discussed this before when you raise these issues of "rights." IF Israel has effective control of territory (1967), before the Independence of the Arab Palestinian People (1988); and the Arab Palestinians demand that Israel relinquish its control over that territory in favor of the Arab Palestinian, THEN the Arab Palestinians are demanding and "action." But IF, as you say, "• Nobody has to do something for people to exercise their rights •" THEN the demand becomes contingent based on the outcome of an Arab Palestinian appeal to the Israels on the natural right (inherent rights) of self-ownership as determined by the Israelis.
Since it is the policy of the Arab Palestinian that armed conflict is the only viable solution, there is no likelihood that Israel will capitulate.
Most Respectfully,
R
ForeverYoung436
Gold Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 6,050
- 1,226
- 245
- Thread starter
- #259
RE: Are the Palestinians a real people?
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
John Rawls, often described as the most important political philosopher of the 20th century, set ideas in motion that are the bedrock in the Principles of justice. This theory establishes two principles of justice from the original position.
◈ The first of these expresses, that 'Basic' liberty includes freedoms of conscience, association and expression as well as democratic rights.
◈ The second principle of equality sets the guarantee of liberties that represent meaningful options for all in society and ensure distributive justice.
These insights approach and include a personal property right, slightly different from what is generally understood. It is defended in terms of "moral capacities" and "self-respect," rather than an appeal to a natural right (inherent rights) of self-ownership.
(COMMENT)
In his book, • A Theory of Justice • Rawls formulated a comprehensive theory of international politics with the publication of • The Law of Peoples.• He claimed there that "well-ordered" peoples could be either "liberal" or "decent". Rawls's basic distinction in international politics is that his preferred emphasis on a society of peoples is separate from the more conventional and historical discussion of international politics as based on relationships between states (as in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States A/RES/25/2625).
You are correct. But only in the sense of "action: (See; Negative vs. Positive Rights)
◈ A negative right is a right not to be subjected to an action of another person or group; negative rights permit or oblige inaction.
◈ A positive right is a right to be subjected to an action or another person or group; positive rights permit or oblige action.
In the discussion of "Rights" relative to the Question of Palestine, we have to be careful... "Negative and positive rights frequently conflict because carrying out the duties conferred by positive rights often entails infringing upon negative rights." (Globalization101 > Issues in Depth > Human Rights > Negative vs. Positive Rights) And the State of Israel will or will not take action based upon the best interest of Israel; just like most countries.
We've discussed this before when you raise these issues of "rights." IF Israel has effective control of territory (1967), before the Independence of the Arab Palestinian People (1988); and the Arab Palestinians demand that Israel relinquish its control over that territory in favor of the Arab Palestinian, THEN the Arab Palestinians are demanding and "action." But IF, as you say, "• Nobody has to do something for people to exercise their rights •" THEN the demand becomes contingent based on the outcome of an Arab Palestinian appeal to the Israels on the natural right (inherent rights) of self-ownership as determined by the Israelis.
Since it is the policy of the Arab Palestinian that armed conflict is the only viable solution, there is no likelihood that Israel will capitulate.
Most Respectfully,
R
This is all very interesting, but you should really start your own thread on that topic. The subject of this thread, in particular, is that the Palestinians aren't really a people, per se. The title of your thread could be "Are the Palestinians pursuing the right methods to get a State of their own?" In the meantime, let's stay on topic.
- Dec 6, 2009
- 77,717
- 4,169
- 1,815
Palestinians have negative rights.RE: Are the Palestinians a real people?
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
John Rawls, often described as the most important political philosopher of the 20th century, set ideas in motion that are the bedrock in the Principles of justice. This theory establishes two principles of justice from the original position.
◈ The first of these expresses, that 'Basic' liberty includes freedoms of conscience, association and expression as well as democratic rights.
◈ The second principle of equality sets the guarantee of liberties that represent meaningful options for all in society and ensure distributive justice.
These insights approach and include a personal property right, slightly different from what is generally understood. It is defended in terms of "moral capacities" and "self-respect," rather than an appeal to a natural right (inherent rights) of self-ownership.
(COMMENT)
In his book, • A Theory of Justice • Rawls formulated a comprehensive theory of international politics with the publication of • The Law of Peoples.• He claimed there that "well-ordered" peoples could be either "liberal" or "decent". Rawls's basic distinction in international politics is that his preferred emphasis on a society of peoples is separate from the more conventional and historical discussion of international politics as based on relationships between states (as in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States A/RES/25/2625).
You are correct. But only in the sense of "action: (See; Negative vs. Positive Rights)
◈ A negative right is a right not to be subjected to an action of another person or group; negative rights permit or oblige inaction.
◈ A positive right is a right to be subjected to an action or another person or group; positive rights permit or oblige action.
In the discussion of "Rights" relative to the Question of Palestine, we have to be careful... "Negative and positive rights frequently conflict because carrying out the duties conferred by positive rights often entails infringing upon negative rights." (Globalization101 > Issues in Depth > Human Rights > Negative vs. Positive Rights) And the State of Israel will or will not take action based upon the best interest of Israel; just like most countries.
We've discussed this before when you raise these issues of "rights." IF Israel has effective control of territory (1967), before the Independence of the Arab Palestinian People (1988); and the Arab Palestinians demand that Israel relinquish its control over that territory in favor of the Arab Palestinian, THEN the Arab Palestinians are demanding and "action." But IF, as you say, "• Nobody has to do something for people to exercise their rights •" THEN the demand becomes contingent based on the outcome of an Arab Palestinian appeal to the Israels on the natural right (inherent rights) of self-ownership as determined by the Israelis.
Since it is the policy of the Arab Palestinian that armed conflict is the only viable solution, there is no likelihood that Israel will capitulate.
Most Respectfully,
R
Similar threads
