Does Isreal build on deeded land for"illegal settelements ?

[mdn2000]

I have seen many sources on the number of Jews at the beginning of the Mandate. I think the low was about 5% and I have seen up to 12% but most are around 7%. I have never seen anything as high as 27%. I say 7% because that seems to be the most common number. The numbers changed rapidly after the first of the century. The increase (along with the threat of taking over the country) is the important part as it put the Palestinians on the defensive.

Thanks, as you know I was not in disagreement with your figure, as I stated in my comment my figure comes from the 1800's, without my library behind me I cannot state the exact figure. Unfortunately I travel thus I cannot bring all my sources.

Figures are meaningless as the Ottomans kept notoriously inaccurate land ownership records, as did the British.

The matter, however, is moot as international treaty transferred sovereignty over Palestine to the Jews after World War I andinternational law established Palestine as the Jewish homeland.

Now, even YOU know.

Mouth69 (marc39) shows bigotry once again, the bigots eyes see only one thing, my figures do not come from the Ottomans, my figures do not come from the British, my figures do come from the 1800's, as in written in the 1899's, I find its best to use sources close to the times in question, not exclusively but that said sometimes a source closer to the period of time in study is more relevant and less tainted by today's political bias.

Which international treaty, how about a link, you cite a treaty yet no link, which "andinternational law" or did you mean international law, which law by whose authority. Links, sources?

Of course the most obvious error in the bigots wrong headed idea of history is that sovereignty was passed directly to Jews after WW I, fact is a mandate was given to the British.

Treaty, which treaty.

Bigots will ignore this.

 

[Marc39]

Thanks, as you know I was not in disagreement with your figure, as I stated in my comment my figure comes from the 1800's, without my library behind me I cannot state the exact figure. Unfortunately I travel thus I cannot bring all my sources.

Figures are meaningless as the Ottomans kept notoriously inaccurate land ownership records, as did the British.

The matter, however, is moot as international treaty transferred sovereignty over Palestine to the Jews after World War I andinternational law established Palestine as the Jewish homeland.

Now, even YOU know.

Mouth69 (marc39) shows bigotry once again, the bigots eyes see only one thing, my figures do not come from the Ottomans, my figures do not come from the British, my figures do come from the 1800's, as in written in the 1899's, I find its best to use sources close to the times in question, not exclusively but that said sometimes a source closer to the period of time in study is more relevant and less tainted by today's political bias.

Which international treaty, how about a link, you cite a treaty yet no link, which "andinternational law" or did you mean international law, which law by whose authority. Links, sources?

Of course the most obvious error in the bigots wrong headed idea of history is that sovereignty was passed directly to Jews after WW I, fact is a mandate was given to the British.

Treaty, which treaty.

Bigots will ignore this.

Treaty: San Remo Resolution
Law: Palestine Mandate.

Now, even a dolt like you knows.

 

[mdn2000]

Figures are meaningless as the Ottomans kept notoriously inaccurate land ownership records, as did the British.

The matter, however, is moot as international treaty transferred sovereignty over Palestine to the Jews after World War I andinternational law established Palestine as the Jewish homeland.

Now, even YOU know.

Mouth69 (marc39) shows bigotry once again, the bigots eyes see only one thing, my figures do not come from the Ottomans, my figures do not come from the British, my figures do come from the 1800's, as in written in the 1899's, I find its best to use sources close to the times in question, not exclusively but that said sometimes a source closer to the period of time in study is more relevant and less tainted by today's political bias.

Which international treaty, how about a link, you cite a treaty yet no link, which "andinternational law" or did you mean international law, which law by whose authority. Links, sources?

Of course the most obvious error in the bigots wrong headed idea of history is that sovereignty was passed directly to Jews after WW I, fact is a mandate was given to the British.

Treaty, which treaty.

Bigots will ignore this.

Treaty: San Remo Resolution
Law: Palestine Mandate.

Now, even a dolt like you knows.

The matter, however, is moot as international treaty transferred sovereignty over Palestine to the Jews after World War I andinternational law established Palestine as the Jewish homeland.

No, the San Remo Conference gave Britian the Mandate over Palestine.

Treaty: San Remo Resolution

Extremely moronic post, no treaty came out of the San Remo Conference. The Palestinian Mandate was not international law.

The San Remo Resolution stated the Mandatory power, being Britian in regards of Palestine would establish a home for Jews in Palestine. The San Remo Resolution did state that Syria and Mespotamia would be recognized as independent states.

Its very clear that the Palestinian Mandate and the San Remo resolution did not establish Israel as a state.

International law coming from the League of Nations, pretty moronic, the USA was not a member of the League of Nations for the simple fact no international law superceded the rights of Americans, the only law recognized by Americans is the Constitution.

 

[mdn2000]

Mouth69 (marc39) shows bigotry once again, the bigots eyes see only one thing, my figures do not come from the Ottomans, my figures do not come from the British, my figures do come from the 1800's, as in written in the 1899's, I find its best to use sources close to the times in question, not exclusively but that said sometimes a source closer to the period of time in study is more relevant and less tainted by today's political bias.

Which international treaty, how about a link, you cite a treaty yet no link, which "andinternational law" or did you mean international law, which law by whose authority. Links, sources?

Of course the most obvious error in the bigots wrong headed idea of history is that sovereignty was passed directly to Jews after WW I, fact is a mandate was given to the British.

Treaty, which treaty.

Bigots will ignore this.

Treaty: San Remo Resolution
Law: Palestine Mandate.

Now, even a dolt like you knows.

The matter, however, is moot as international treaty transferred sovereignty over Palestine to the Jews after World War I andinternational law established Palestine as the Jewish homeland.

No, the San Remo Conference gave Britian the Mandate over Palestine.

Treaty: San Remo Resolution

Extremely moronic post, no treaty came out of the San Remo Conference. The Palestinian Mandate was not international law.

The San Remo Resolution stated the Mandatory power, being Britian in regards of Palestine would establish a home for Jews in Palestine. The San Remo Resolution did state that Syria and Mespotamia would be recognized as independent states.

Its very clear that the Palestinian Mandate and the San Remo resolution did not establish Israel as a state.

International law coming from the League of Nations, pretty moronic, the USA was not a member of the League of Nations for the simple fact no international law superceded the rights of Americans, the only law recognized by Americans is the Constitution.

Nice post MDN2000, dont hold your breath waiting for mouth69 to respond

 

[Winston Smith]

I have seen many sources on the number of Jews at the beginning of the Mandate. I think the low was about 5% and I have seen up to 12% but most are around 7%. I have never seen anything as high as 27%. I say 7% because that seems to be the most common number. The numbers changed rapidly after the first of the century. The increase (along with the threat of taking over the country) is the important part as it put the Palestinians on the defensive.

Thanks, as you know I was not in disagreement with your figure, as I stated in my comment my figure comes from the 1800's, without my library behind me I cannot state the exact figure. Unfortunately I travel thus I cannot bring all my sources.

Figures are meaningless as the Ottomans kept notoriously inaccurate land ownership records, as did the British.

The matter, however, is moot as international treaty transferred sovereignty over Palestine to the Jews after World War I andinternational law established Palestine as the Jewish homeland.

Now, even YOU know.

You are amazing. any data that doesen't support your theory is either meaningless, a lie, an israeli propaganda, or part of the "Hasbara BS line"...i don't expect anything else from you anymore, i just hope the others users here have noticed it!

 

[Shogun]

pwned

 

[Marc39]

pwned

Stoner, only in your drug-induced hallucinations.

 

[Shogun]

no, you've been pwned. enjoy.

 

[Marc39]

no, you've been pwned. enjoy.

Powerful crack, eh?

 

[Shogun]

no, you've been pwned. enjoy.

Powerful crack, eh?

Is that what your last driveway client pointed out about your concrete work, day labor?

 

[Marc39]

no, you've been pwned. enjoy.

Powerful crack, eh?

Is that what your last driveway client pointed out about your concrete work, day labor?

No, that's what your drug dealer tells you, stoner.

 

[mdn2000]

Powerful crack, eh?

Is that what your last driveway client pointed out about your concrete work, day labor?

No, that's what your drug dealer tells you, stoner.

So its settled, you were wrong on three points.

 

[Shogun]

Powerful crack, eh?

Is that what your last driveway client pointed out about your concrete work, day labor?

No, that's what your drug dealer tells you, stoner.

you don't know him, I assure you. He's jewish and hates zionists. You'd have been curbstomped long ago.

 

[mdn2000]

The Jewish population in Palestine was about 7% before the Mandate and increased to about 30% by 1947. There are different numbers floating around but these are in the ball park. Most are roughly the same. The 7% land ownership is in line with common estimates.

Population figures are the most difficult to figure out, just about every book is different, people must be very specifiic as far citing a source and the year. In the 1800's I have seen the figure of around 27% Jewish, around 25% Christian/other and give or take 45% Arab, so with a "grain of salt", Jews/Christian/Other are the minority. Some cities had Arab populations that lived in tents so I am not sure if you can count the Bedouin Arabs as living in Palestine.

I have seen many sources on the number of Jews at the beginning of the Mandate. I think the low was about 5% and I have seen up to 12% but most are around 7%. I have never seen anything as high as 27%. I say 7% because that seems to be the most common number. The numbers changed rapidly after the first of the century. The increase (along with the threat of taking over the country) is the important part as it put the Palestinians on the defensive.

Many sources, great, tell us about those many sources, remember wikipedia and google results are not sources.

I would be happy to see you post one source that is not a google or wiki.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Population figures are the most difficult to figure out, just about every book is different, people must be very specifiic as far citing a source and the year. In the 1800's I have seen the figure of around 27% Jewish, around 25% Christian/other and give or take 45% Arab, so with a "grain of salt", Jews/Christian/Other are the minority. Some cities had Arab populations that lived in tents so I am not sure if you can count the Bedouin Arabs as living in Palestine.

I have seen many sources on the number of Jews at the beginning of the Mandate. I think the low was about 5% and I have seen up to 12% but most are around 7%. I have never seen anything as high as 27%. I say 7% because that seems to be the most common number. The numbers changed rapidly after the first of the century. The increase (along with the threat of taking over the country) is the important part as it put the Palestinians on the defensive.

Many sources, great, tell us about those many sources, remember wikipedia and google results are not sources.

I would be happy to see you post one source that is not a google or wiki.

Year Arabs % Jews % Total

1870, 367,224, 98, 7,000. 2, 375,000
1893, 469,000, 98, 10,000, 2, 497,000
1912, 525,000, 93, 40,000, 6, 565,000
1920, 542,000, 90, 61,000, 10, 603,000
1925, 598,000, 83, 120,000, 17, 719,000
1930, 763,000, 82, 165,000, 18, 928,000
1935, 886,000, 71, 355,000, 29, 1,241,000
1940, 1,014,000, 69,463,000, 31, 1,478,000
1946, 1,237,000, 65, 608,000, 35, 1,845,000

MidEast Web - Population of Palestine

I would be interested in your 27% figure.

 

[mdn2000]

I took an educated guess based on my research.

I see you googled your information.

The internet generation learns only what they want to know using google as a source.

I see there are references on the website so give me a bit of time so I can check and see what I think.

I personally own about a hundred books on Palestine dating back to the 1800's, the ones useful to me are back at the hotel so I will get back to this later.

Thanks though, I love when I get more information and find other sources I can research.

 

[mdn2000]

I have seen many sources on the number of Jews at the beginning of the Mandate. I think the low was about 5% and I have seen up to 12% but most are around 7%. I have never seen anything as high as 27%. I say 7% because that seems to be the most common number. The numbers changed rapidly after the first of the century. The increase (along with the threat of taking over the country) is the important part as it put the Palestinians on the defensive.

Many sources, great, tell us about those many sources, remember wikipedia and google results are not sources.

I would be happy to see you post one source that is not a google or wiki.

Year Arabs % Jews % Total

1870, 367,224, 98, 7,000. 2, 375,000
1893, 469,000, 98, 10,000, 2, 497,000
1912, 525,000, 93, 40,000, 6, 565,000
1920, 542,000, 90, 61,000, 10, 603,000
1925, 598,000, 83, 120,000, 17, 719,000
1930, 763,000, 82, 165,000, 18, 928,000
1935, 886,000, 71, 355,000, 29, 1,241,000
1940, 1,014,000, 69,463,000, 31, 1,478,000
1946, 1,237,000, 65, 608,000, 35, 1,845,000

MidEast Web - Population of Palestine

I would be interested in your 27% figure.

I click on you link but I cannot find the table you posted.

Where did you get the table.

I have looked three times.

Further your 7% figure is nowhere to be found.

You googled to try and save face when challenged as far as I can see.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Many sources, great, tell us about those many sources, remember wikipedia and google results are not sources.

I would be happy to see you post one source that is not a google or wiki.

Year Arabs % Jews % Total

1870, 367,224, 98, 7,000. 2, 375,000
1893, 469,000, 98, 10,000, 2, 497,000
1912, 525,000, 93, 40,000, 6, 565,000
1920, 542,000, 90, 61,000, 10, 603,000
1925, 598,000, 83, 120,000, 17, 719,000
1930, 763,000, 82, 165,000, 18, 928,000
1935, 886,000, 71, 355,000, 29, 1,241,000
1940, 1,014,000, 69,463,000, 31, 1,478,000
1946, 1,237,000, 65, 608,000, 35, 1,845,000

MidEast Web - Population of Palestine

I would be interested in your 27% figure.

I click on you link but I cannot find the table you posted.

Where did you get the table.

I have looked three times.

Further your 7% figure is nowhere to be found.

You googled to try and save face when challenged as far as I can see.

I never claimed that 7% was the definitive number. This is not a wedding party. No one will have to stand if the numbers are not correct. In this conflict it matters not if the number was 5% or 7% or 10%, it is the rapid increase that was the root of the problem. I don't think anyone has an accurate number. I gave a range of numbers that I have seen and I posted this table because it is typical, and within my stated range, not to prove my 7% to be correct.

 

[mdn2000]

Year Arabs % Jews % Total

1870, 367,224, 98, 7,000. 2, 375,000
1893, 469,000, 98, 10,000, 2, 497,000
1912, 525,000, 93, 40,000, 6, 565,000
1920, 542,000, 90, 61,000, 10, 603,000
1925, 598,000, 83, 120,000, 17, 719,000
1930, 763,000, 82, 165,000, 18, 928,000
1935, 886,000, 71, 355,000, 29, 1,241,000
1940, 1,014,000, 69,463,000, 31, 1,478,000
1946, 1,237,000, 65, 608,000, 35, 1,845,000

MidEast Web - Population of Palestine

I would be interested in your 27% figure.

I click on you link but I cannot find the table you posted.

Where did you get the table.

I have looked three times.

Further your 7% figure is nowhere to be found.

You googled to try and save face when challenged as far as I can see.

I never claimed that 7% was the definitive number. This is not a wedding party. No one will have to stand if the numbers are not correct. In this conflict it matters not if the number was 5% or 7% or 10%, it is the rapid increase that was the root of the problem. I don't think anyone has an accurate number. I gave a range of numbers that I have seen and I posted this table because it is typical, and within my stated range, not to prove my 7% to be correct.

The numbers do matter a bit, not as a deciding factor but simply to get the story straight. Scholars who use unsubstantiated low figures are simply not interested in the truth.

In 1944 Walter Clay Lowdermile wrote in "Palestine, Land of Promise" stated the population of Palestine was 1,500,000.

Give or take this figure is confirmed by the website you linked to.

What the website does not state is that this was the population of Israel and Jordan or as it was known than Trans-Jordan.

Jordan is Palestine hence the population figures include Jordan, your link does not make this distinction hence I must call into the links credibility. Of course there is a very critical critic of the population figures given in your link on the site itself, fine print at the bottom of the site.

Population is very important because it directly relates to immigration as well. Just off the top of my head from around the mid 1930's to 1944 Arab population rose by 400,000. Why is that, how did the Arab population rise.

These are things that Truman knew, these figures and facts are what most leaders of the free world knew. Advisers to world leaders were experts on Palestine and educated the leaders so that they could make the correct decisions.

A rapid increase in Jewish population was accompanied by a rapid increase in Arab population.

Arab population increase is a direct cause of the opportunity created by world interest in the Jews.

I think that is enough for you to digest at this time. If you really want to know what happened in Palestine its time to pick up books or just take my word for it.

A few members of the USMB should humble themselves and learn from my posts as well. I won't call them out by name, I have hounded them enough, at least it seems I have.

The truth is not a google search result.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I click on you link but I cannot find the table you posted.

Where did you get the table.

I have looked three times.

Further your 7% figure is nowhere to be found.

You googled to try and save face when challenged as far as I can see.

I never claimed that 7% was the definitive number. This is not a wedding party. No one will have to stand if the numbers are not correct. In this conflict it matters not if the number was 5% or 7% or 10%, it is the rapid increase that was the root of the problem. I don't think anyone has an accurate number. I gave a range of numbers that I have seen and I posted this table because it is typical, and within my stated range, not to prove my 7% to be correct.

The numbers do matter a bit, not as a deciding factor but simply to get the story straight. Scholars who use unsubstantiated low figures are simply not interested in the truth.

In 1944 Walter Clay Lowdermile wrote in "Palestine, Land of Promise" stated the population of Palestine was 1,500,000.

Give or take this figure is confirmed by the website you linked to.

What the website does not state is that this was the population of Israel and Jordan or as it was known than Trans-Jordan.

Jordan is Palestine hence the population figures include Jordan, your link does not make this distinction hence I must call into the links credibility. Of course there is a very critical critic of the population figures given in your link on the site itself, fine print at the bottom of the site.

Population is very important because it directly relates to immigration as well. Just off the top of my head from around the mid 1930's to 1944 Arab population rose by 400,000. Why is that, how did the Arab population rise.

These are things that Truman knew, these figures and facts are what most leaders of the free world knew. Advisers to world leaders were experts on Palestine and educated the leaders so that they could make the correct decisions.

A rapid increase in Jewish population was accompanied by a rapid increase in Arab population.

Arab population increase is a direct cause of the opportunity created by world interest in the Jews.

I think that is enough for you to digest at this time. If you really want to know what happened in Palestine its time to pick up books or just take my word for it.

A few members of the USMB should humble themselves and learn from my posts as well. I won't call them out by name, I have hounded them enough, at least it seems I have.

The truth is not a google search result.

These are things that Truman knew, these figures and facts are what most leaders of the free world knew. Advisers to world leaders were experts on Palestine and educated the leaders so that they could make the correct decisions.

Either they were ill-advised or they did not head that advice. Look at the mess we are in.