Refugees and the right to return

[Shusha]

Sure, the rule of nationality and state succession.

What this means is that when a territory changes hands, all of the inhabitants of that territory will become citizens of that new state. We see this regularly in treaties and legal documents.

Sure. So in 1925 all citizens formerly Turkish citizens became citizens of the geographical territory referred to as Palestine, under the control and tutelage of the British Government. But where do you go from there?

What happened next was that the Arab Palestinians opted out of the State which was legally formed and engaged in hostilities with the legal government. Further a number of other sovereign States became belligerents and occupied parts of the territory.
States are not obligated to maintain a hostile population during a conflict. Neither are they obligated to return a hostile population during a conflict.

Even if you concede (and you do not) that the entire territory transferred from British government control to Israeli sovereignty, there is no obligation on Israel to take in a hostile population.

So, walk me through your thinking here. It almost seems to me that you are claiming that the Palestinians can NOT secede from Israel.

 

[Shusha]

No, it's the Zionist way of thinking that only people that practice Judaism must rule and that the state they rule can't be a secular state with equality for people of all confessions.

No. Its accepted practice in the world that nations are formed around ethnic and cultural groups in order for those groups to fulfill their desire for self-determination. It is what the Palestinians CLAIM to want (though not what they actually want).

You are just applying a double standard to Israel and no other group. For example, you frequently champion the rights of the Jordanian people as being a homeland for the Hashemites. The Hashemites rule because, as you claim, they are a separate ethnic/cultural group who have (historical) rights to self-determination in the Kingdom of Jordan. Why is it that you don't insist that Jordan become a secular nation? Why is it you don't insist that the Hashemites not be permitted to "rule"? Why is it that you insist that the Hashemites do not have equality for all people?




And Israel is a largely secular State with equality for all.

 

[fanger]

 

[MJB12741]

The partition in 1948 left a third of the Muslims and Christians within the Jew partition and would have relegated them disenfranchised never to achieve self-determination. This, notwithstanding being a majority (when combined with the Muslim Bedouin population) because the UN insisted that Jews had to rule over non-Jews. No people could have accepted relegating a third of their population, who still owned 90% of the land, within the Jew partition to subservience to Jews forever.

Your premise is in error. Your premise is that a population of one culture can not live in a nation dominated by another culture, because to do so is "subservience". By your premise, every nation must be completely ethnically homogeneous. That is just a false premise.

This is an Arab Muslim way of thinking, though, stemming from ideas of dhimmi status, which they falsely then project onto other peoples.

A dhimmi ([ðimi]; Arabic: ذمي, meaning "protected person") refers to specific individuals living in Muslim lands, who were granted special status and safety in Islamic law in return for paying the capital tax. This status was originally only made available to non-Muslims who were People of the Book, namely, Jews and Christians), but was later extended to include Zoroastrians, Mandeans, and, in some areas, Hindus[1] and Buddhists.[2] The term connotes an obligation of the state to protect the individual, including the individual's life, property, and freedom of religion and worship, and required loyalty to the empire, and a poll tax known as the jizya.Dhimmi had fewer legal and social rights than Muslims, but more rights than other non-Muslim religious subjects.[3] This status applied to millions of people living from the Atlantic Ocean to India from the seventh century until modern times.
Dhimmi - New World Encyclopedia
Americans pay a Tax to israel, does that make them Dhimmi's to israel or merely Dhummi's?

Disgusting isn't it? Dhimmi's." Peoples of all non Muslim faiths pay a tax to the Muslim rulers who stole their land.

 

[Kondor3]

Palestinian "Right of Return" ???

In what Alternative Universe do you expect this to unfold?

Put down the bong, fer Crissakes...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Cool British coin.

 

[rylah]

Plaestina (Eretz Israel)1927 = פלשתינה (א"י) 1927

 

[Kondor3]

"Hang onto your Confederate money, boys... the South is gonna rise again !!!"

 

[montelatici]

No, it's the Zionist way of thinking that only people that practice Judaism must rule and that the state they rule can't be a secular state with equality for people of all confessions.

No. Its accepted practice in the world that nations are formed around ethnic and cultural groups in order for those groups to fulfill their desire for self-determination. It is what the Palestinians CLAIM to want (though not what they actually want).

You are just applying a double standard to Israel and no other group. For example, you frequently champion the rights of the Jordanian people as being a homeland for the Hashemites. The Hashemites rule because, as you claim, they are a separate ethnic/cultural group who have (historical) rights to self-determination in the Kingdom of Jordan. Why is it that you don't insist that Jordan become a secular nation? Why is it you don't insist that the Hashemites not be permitted to "rule"? Why is it that you insist that the Hashemites do not have equality for all people?




And Israel is a largely secular State with equality for all.

I do believe that all states should be secular. Israel is a theocracy and non-Jews do not have equal rights. Israel is simply a European colonial settler project that has become an Apartheid state.

In any case, the Arabian Bedouins ruled by the Hashemites are not settler colonists from Europe, they are the native people of the area.

What fails to register in your pea brain is that there were native people living in Palestine and at least 95% of them were Christians and Muslims. Europeans colonized the land under the protection of the British military. It is no different than what happened in the creation of Rhodesia.

 

[P F Tinmore]

What happened next was that the Arab Palestinians opted out of the State which was legally formed and engaged in hostilities with the legal government.

Link?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Even if you concede (and you do not) that the entire territory transferred from British government control to Israeli sovereignty,

Link?

 

[montelatici]

Shusha is such a tool. Foreigners from Europe invade an inhabited land with the intention of colonizing it and he calls the natives hostiles. Unbelievable logic. The hostiles are the bastards that colonized the land.

 

[Shusha]

Shusha is such a tool. Foreigners from Europe invade an inhabited land with the intention of colonizing it and he calls the natives hostiles. Unbelievable logic. The hostiles are the bastards that colonized the land.

Oh! The irony on a thread devoted to the right of return!

Foreigners invaders usurp Jewish ancestral and historical land and ethnically cleanse the territory. Then complain when those who were sent into a Diaspora return. And then demand that the invaders and colonizers who replaced the indigenous people be permitted to return as a right over the return of the indigenous people. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish were there and originated there. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were there prior to any other existing cultural group. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were not prevented from exercising their sovereignty, self-determination, self-government by invaders and colonizers. It would be the height of foolishness to deny any of those things.

Your denial rests on the idea that people forcibly removed from territory and their descendants lost all rights to the invaded and conquered territory. And yet you have the nerve to demand that the invaders are the ones with the true rights! Unbelievable.



And, Shusha is a she. Shusha has noted repeatedly that she is a she. Pay attention.

 

[fanger]

Shusha is such a tool. Foreigners from Europe invade an inhabited land with the intention of colonizing it and he calls the natives hostiles. Unbelievable logic. The hostiles are the bastards that colonized the land.

Oh! The irony on a thread devoted to the right of return!

Foreigners invaders usurp Jewish ancestral and historical land and ethnically cleanse the territory. Then complain when those who were sent into a Diaspora return. And then demand that the invaders and colonizers who replaced the indigenous people be permitted to return as a right over the return of the indigenous people. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish were there and originated there. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were there prior to any other existing cultural group. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were not prevented from exercising their sovereignty, self-determination, self-government by invaders and colonizers. It would be the height of foolishness to deny any of those things.

Your denial rests on the idea that people forcibly removed from territory and their descendants lost all rights to the invaded and conquered territory. And yet you have the nerve to demand that the invaders are the ones with the true rights! Unbelievable.



And, Shusha is a she. Shusha has noted repeatedly that she is a she. Pay attention.

Sand began his work by looking for research studies about forcible exile of Jews from the area now bordered by modern Israel, and its surrounding regions. He was astonished that he could find no such literature, he says, given that the expulsion of Jews from the region is viewed as a constitutive event in Jewish history. The conclusion he came to from his subsequent investigation is that the expulsion simply did not happen, that no one exiled the Jewish people from the region, and that the Jewish diaspora is essentially a modern invention. He accounts for the appearance of millions of Jews around the Mediterranean and elsewhere as something that came about primarily through the religious conversion of local people, saying that Judaism, contrary to popular opinion, was very much a "converting religion" in former times. He holds that mass conversions were first brought about by the Hasmoneans under the influence of Hellenism, and continued untilChristianity rose to dominance in the fourth century CE
The Invention of the Jewish People - Wikipedia

 

[rylah]

Shusha is such a tool. Foreigners from Europe invade an inhabited land with the intention of colonizing it and he calls the natives hostiles. Unbelievable logic. The hostiles are the bastards that colonized the land.

Oh! The irony on a thread devoted to the right of return!

Foreigners invaders usurp Jewish ancestral and historical land and ethnically cleanse the territory. Then complain when those who were sent into a Diaspora return. And then demand that the invaders and colonizers who replaced the indigenous people be permitted to return as a right over the return of the indigenous people. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish were there and originated there. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were there prior to any other existing cultural group. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were not prevented from exercising their sovereignty, self-determination, self-government by invaders and colonizers. It would be the height of foolishness to deny any of those things.

Your denial rests on the idea that people forcibly removed from territory and their descendants lost all rights to the invaded and conquered territory. And yet you have the nerve to demand that the invaders are the ones with the true rights! Unbelievable.



And, Shusha is a she. Shusha has noted repeatedly that she is a she. Pay attention.

Sand began his work by looking for research studies about forcible exile of Jews from the area now bordered by modern Israel, and its surrounding regions. He was astonished that he could find no such literature, he says, given that the expulsion of Jews from the region is viewed as a constitutive event in Jewish history. The conclusion he came to from his subsequent investigation is that the expulsion simply did not happen, that no one exiled the Jewish people from the region, and that the Jewish diaspora is essentially a modern invention. He accounts for the appearance of millions of Jews around the Mediterranean and elsewhere as something that came about primarily through the religious conversion of local people, saying that Judaism, contrary to popular opinion, was very much a "converting religion" in former times. He holds that mass conversions were first brought about by the Hasmoneans under the influence of Hellenism, and continued untilChristianity rose to dominance in the fourth century CE
The Invention of the Jewish People - Wikipedia

I get it now Zionists invented the Jews some 100 years ago. And the whole world bought it just like that out of thin air.
Actually there were no Jews or Israel prior to the internet.

"The Internet is a Zionist conspiracy to invent the Jews." Right?

We know who still identify as Arab Syrians and it's not the Jews...

 

[P F Tinmore]

Shusha is such a tool. Foreigners from Europe invade an inhabited land with the intention of colonizing it and he calls the natives hostiles. Unbelievable logic. The hostiles are the bastards that colonized the land.

Oh! The irony on a thread devoted to the right of return!

Foreigners invaders usurp Jewish ancestral and historical land and ethnically cleanse the territory. Then complain when those who were sent into a Diaspora return. And then demand that the invaders and colonizers who replaced the indigenous people be permitted to return as a right over the return of the indigenous people. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish were there and originated there. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were there prior to any other existing cultural group. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were not prevented from exercising their sovereignty, self-determination, self-government by invaders and colonizers. It would be the height of foolishness to deny any of those things.

Your denial rests on the idea that people forcibly removed from territory and their descendants lost all rights to the invaded and conquered territory. And yet you have the nerve to demand that the invaders are the ones with the true rights! Unbelievable.



And, Shusha is a she. Shusha has noted repeatedly that she is a she. Pay attention.

How many of the recent settlers (the last hundred years) went to reclaim a home or farm that they left some time in the past?

 

[xyz]

The partition in 1948 left a third of the Muslims and Christians within the Jew partition and would have relegated them disenfranchised never to achieve self-determination. This, notwithstanding being a majority (when combined with the Muslim Bedouin population) because the UN insisted that Jews had to rule over non-Jews. No people could have accepted relegating a third of their population, who still owned 90% of the land, within the Jew partition to subservience to Jews forever.

Your premise is in error. Your premise is that a population of one culture can not live in a nation dominated by another culture, because to do so is "subservience". By your premise, every nation must be completely ethnically homogeneous. That is just a false premise.

This is an Arab Muslim way of thinking, though, stemming from ideas of dhimmi status, which they falsely then project onto other peoples.

No, it's the Zionist way of thinking that only people that practice Judaism must rule and that the state they rule can't be a secular state with equality for people of all confessions.

Not really, some Zionists are actually atheists, although I rather agree they believe the second part.

 

[montelatici]

Shusha is such a tool. Foreigners from Europe invade an inhabited land with the intention of colonizing it and he calls the natives hostiles. Unbelievable logic. The hostiles are the bastards that colonized the land.

Oh! The irony on a thread devoted to the right of return!

Foreigners invaders usurp Jewish ancestral and historical land and ethnically cleanse the territory. Then complain when those who were sent into a Diaspora return. And then demand that the invaders and colonizers who replaced the indigenous people be permitted to return as a right over the return of the indigenous people. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish were there and originated there. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were there prior to any other existing cultural group. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were not prevented from exercising their sovereignty, self-determination, self-government by invaders and colonizers. It would be the height of foolishness to deny any of those things.

Your denial rests on the idea that people forcibly removed from territory and their descendants lost all rights to the invaded and conquered territory. And yet you have the nerve to demand that the invaders are the ones with the true rights! Unbelievable.



And, Shusha is a she. Shusha has noted repeatedly that she is a she. Pay attention.

The European Jews were/are Europeans, they weren't returning to the Middle East, they were colonizing the place. The native Muslims and Christians they found there are the descendants of the people that practiced Judaism, Samaritanism, Paganism that converted to Christianity and then to Islam.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Shusha is such a tool. Foreigners from Europe invade an inhabited land with the intention of colonizing it and he calls the natives hostiles. Unbelievable logic. The hostiles are the bastards that colonized the land.

Oh! The irony on a thread devoted to the right of return!

Foreigners invaders usurp Jewish ancestral and historical land and ethnically cleanse the territory. Then complain when those who were sent into a Diaspora return. And then demand that the invaders and colonizers who replaced the indigenous people be permitted to return as a right over the return of the indigenous people. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish were there and originated there. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were there prior to any other existing cultural group. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were not prevented from exercising their sovereignty, self-determination, self-government by invaders and colonizers. It would be the height of foolishness to deny any of those things.

Your denial rests on the idea that people forcibly removed from territory and their descendants lost all rights to the invaded and conquered territory. And yet you have the nerve to demand that the invaders are the ones with the true rights! Unbelievable.



And, Shusha is a she. Shusha has noted repeatedly that she is a she. Pay attention.

The European Jews were/are Europeans, they weren't returning to the Middle East, they were colonizing the place. The native Muslims and Christians they found there are the descendants of the people that practiced Judaism, Samaritanism, Paganism that converted to Christianity and then to Islam.

Just because you keep on repeating the same paragraph, doesn't make it true.

 

[montelatici]

Shusha is such a tool. Foreigners from Europe invade an inhabited land with the intention of colonizing it and he calls the natives hostiles. Unbelievable logic. The hostiles are the bastards that colonized the land.

Oh! The irony on a thread devoted to the right of return!

Foreigners invaders usurp Jewish ancestral and historical land and ethnically cleanse the territory. Then complain when those who were sent into a Diaspora return. And then demand that the invaders and colonizers who replaced the indigenous people be permitted to return as a right over the return of the indigenous people. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish were there and originated there. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were there prior to any other existing cultural group. Surely you are not going to deny that the Jewish people were not prevented from exercising their sovereignty, self-determination, self-government by invaders and colonizers. It would be the height of foolishness to deny any of those things.

Your denial rests on the idea that people forcibly removed from territory and their descendants lost all rights to the invaded and conquered territory. And yet you have the nerve to demand that the invaders are the ones with the true rights! Unbelievable.



And, Shusha is a she. Shusha has noted repeatedly that she is a she. Pay attention.

The European Jews were/are Europeans, they weren't returning to the Middle East, they were colonizing the place. The native Muslims and Christians they found there are the descendants of the people that practiced Judaism, Samaritanism, Paganism that converted to Christianity and then to Islam.

Just because you keep on repeating the same paragraph, doesn't make it true.

It's just a fact. The Zionists came from Europe. The Muslims and Christians of Palestine lived in Palestine. But, you can believe the fantasy that you have been brainwashed with.