- Dec 6, 2009
- 78,544
- 4,344
- 1,815
- Thread starter
- #641
There was no partition.montelatici, et al,
Well, actually, you don't see many founding fathers of Israel that were born in Palestine.
I tried to make two points here:
- That Hussein bin Ali, GCB, Grand Sharif and Emir of Mecca (and ruler of Medina, capital of the al-Madinah Region); last of the Hashemite Sharifians, with Mecca being the birthplace of Muhammad (PBUH), and the site of the first revelation of the Quran (and Medina - where the final surahs of the Quran were revealed to the Prophet, called Medinan surahs); the two holiest cities in the religion of Islam; and Mecca being the former capital city of the Hejaz (now a capital of Makkah Province in Saudi Arabia); --- was not just any "self appointed Bedouin king from deep in the Arabian desert."
- That Hussein bin Ali, was a highly regarded by Shiite Muslim, and his sons, made themselves useful to the British Empire and were instrumental in initiating the Arab Revolt in 1916 against the Ottoman Empire; helping to pin-down Ottoman Forces that would have otherwise been free to attack the British Egyptian Expeditionary Forces.
(COMMENT)With all of that Rocco, what does it mean? That some self appointed Bedouin king from deep in the Arabian desert had the right to make decisions for the native Christians and Muslims of Palestine? How many Palestinian (Arab) Jews participated in the battles against the Turks?
Just like the House of Saud went to work --- and out of all the potential leaders in the Court of Sheikhs --- became the House that unified the many tribes in Arabia. So it is that the House of Prince Ali, last King of Hejaz, attempted to expand the Hashemites by assisting in the liberation of the Middle Eastern Region from Ottoman sovereignty.
Sons in the House of Prince Ali, last King of Hejaz:
In the open period of the Mandate, the Jewish Organizations mustered resources to secure the establishment of a Jewish National Home in ancient region of Palestine. The indigenous Arab population of Palestine, with a territorial history in the land for two millennia disapproved of the 1919 agreement between Emir Faisal and Chaim Weizmann pertaining to the individual "national aspirations" of the Arab and the Jewish. Additionally, the indigenous Arab Population --- which did not assist in the liberation effort, mistakenly felt that they should be awarded territorial concessions for nothing, and opposed the decision by the Allied Powers to start a resettlement project for the purpose of preserving and protecting the Jewish Culture from extinction. In the late 1970's the Arab Palestinians would adopt the mantra that such a move violated their natural and inalienable rights; although these rights did not exist at the time the Allied Powers made the decisions. They also viewed it as an infringement of assurances of independence given by the Allied Powers to Arab leaders in return for their support during the war. While it is a matter of record, that Prince Faisal did write (10 March 1921) to the Allied Powers through the British House of Commons on the issue of the Arabs entered the war on the side of the Allies with certain clear aims - unfulfilled by the Powers, it is NOT a case that the Arabs of Palestine had any legitimate claim. The Faisal Memo was submitted by General Hoddad Pasha (Hejaz Army) and delegated by His Royal Highness Emir Faisal --- it was fair in saying the Army of the Hejaz had a claim; but their was no associated effort by an Arab Army west of the Jordan River; it was a false claim. The outcome was mounting resistance to the Mandate by Palestinian Arabs, and the resort to an ever gradually escalating level of violence against the Jewish community; including the Arab creation of Palestinian Black Hand by Izz ad-Din al-Qassam (who would become the name sake martyr of the military wing and brigade of the same name in the Islamic Resistance Movement nearly 60 years later).
- Prince Abdullah, Emir (later King) of Transjordan
- Prince Faisal, (later King) of Iraq and Syria
There is no question that there was a promise made to the Last King of the Hejaz concerning the Kingdoms owed the surviving sons. But there was no such promise made to the Arab west of the Jordan, because they made NO significant contribution in the liberation. And on the contrary, they actually created disturbances and disruption in public order for the Administration.
In separate reports, one by the Civil Administration and one by the Military Support Detachment, this commentary set the tone.
- In April, 1920, five Jews were killed and over two hundred injured in the first outbreak of anti-Zionist Arab violence.
- A year later, in May 1921, more serious attacks were make by Arabs on the Jews of Jaffa and of five rural settlements. On this occasion 47 Jews were killed and 146 wounded.
The demonstrators clashed with the police, and during the next few weeks other riots took place in Jaffa, Nablus, Haifa, and again in Jerusalem. In the course of these disorders, one policeman and 24 civilians were killed. The disturbances of 1933 differed from those of 1920, 1921 and 1929 in that they were directed not against the Jews but against the mandatory Government, which was accused of tilting the balance against the Arabs in its administration of the mandate.Why did the "Bedouin king from deep in the Arabian desert had the right to make decisions?" Because they were the most civilized --- I suspect.
Most Respectfully,
RWell, actually, you don't see many founding fathers of Israel that were born in Palestine.
That is correct. Israel is a foreign government imposed on Palestine by military force.
How is it 'imposing military force' for Israel to legally declare independence on territory allotted to her by the partition plan, which is EXACTLY the same way the Palestinian declared independence