- Dec 6, 2009
- 78,488
- 4,342
- 1,815
And you're trying to make this dumbass argument that a name for the people living in that area for generations, negates their land rights and their inherent right to self-determination.I was responding to the nonsensense that tin posted, though your nonsense was no better which is why I told him in this repsonse that I'll tell him the same thing I told you. Neither one of you are dealing in historical facts or current reality. Both of you are doing nothing but showing your bigotry, prejudice and ignorance.
It doesn't matter what you call them, they were living there before the zionists showed up and they have land rights.
Actually, 'they' were not - beccause to be a Jew IS to be a 'zionist', and zionists were making their way back to the Land in every century after the Romans destroyed all they could of Judea.
And 'they' were not - because all too many of those Muslims and Christians inside the Mandate area in '47 had NOT been there for 'centuries'.
And 'they' were not - because to live on land as a tenant farmer (fellahin) does NOT convey any ownership rights at all. Not under Ottoman nor any other law.
because to live on land as a tenant farmer (fellahin) does NOT convey any ownership rights at all.
Over 90% of Israel is leased to the Israelis. They do not own anything.
According to your criteria, they have no rights to their own state.