Right of return

[toomuchtime_]

UN Resolution 194

According to UN Res 194

It is all irrelevant. Even if we were to suppose 194 did establish a right of return, to claim that right some one who had left would have had to apply to the Israeli government or Israeli courts as an individual to be allowed to live in Israel or to claim his/her property or receive compensation for it. The Arabs who left did not do this, so they effectively abandoned whatever rights they may have had. Three generations later, the grandchild of an Arab who left during the war cannot claim what his grandfather had abandoned.

Of course that is a pantload.

In other words, you don't like it, but you have no specific criticism of it.

 

[Jos]

UN Resolution 194

According to UN Res 194

It is all irrelevant. Even if we were to suppose 194 did establish a right of return, to claim that right some one who had left would have had to apply to the Israeli government or Israeli courts as an individual to be allowed to live in Israel or to claim his/her property or receive compensation for it. The Arabs who left did not do this, so they effectively abandoned whatever rights they may have had. Three generations later, the grandchild of an Arab who left during the war cannot claim what his grandfather had abandoned.

Ah but a descendant of a jew who abandoned property in Germany can claim, how special
BBC News - Nazi looted poster art must be returned to Peter Sachs

 

[Hossfly]

UN Resolution 194

According to UN Res 194

It is all irrelevant. Even if we were to suppose 194 did establish a right of return, to claim that right some one who had left would have had to apply to the Israeli government or Israeli courts as an individual to be allowed to live in Israel or to claim his/her property or receive compensation for it. The Arabs who left did not do this, so they effectively abandoned whatever rights they may have had. Three generations later, the grandchild of an Arab who left during the war cannot claim what his grandfather had abandoned.

Ah but a descendant of a jew who abandoned property in Germany can claim, how special
BBC News - Nazi looted poster art must be returned to Peter Sachs

Get much business thrown your way as an international lawyer? Just curious

 

[P F Tinmore]

It is all irrelevant. Even if we were to suppose 194 did establish a right of return, to claim that right some one who had left would have had to apply to the Israeli government or Israeli courts as an individual to be allowed to live in Israel or to claim his/her property or receive compensation for it. The Arabs who left did not do this, so they effectively abandoned whatever rights they may have had. Three generations later, the grandchild of an Arab who left during the war cannot claim what his grandfather had abandoned.

Of course that is a pantload.

In other words, you don't like it, but you have no specific criticism of it.

Three generations later, the grandchild of an Arab who left during the war cannot claim what his grandfather had abandoned.

They didn't abandon anything. They were run off at the point of a gun.

 

[toomuchtime_]

UN Resolution 194

According to UN Res 194

It is all irrelevant. Even if we were to suppose 194 did establish a right of return, to claim that right some one who had left would have had to apply to the Israeli government or Israeli courts as an individual to be allowed to live in Israel or to claim his/her property or receive compensation for it. The Arabs who left did not do this, so they effectively abandoned whatever rights they may have had. Three generations later, the grandchild of an Arab who left during the war cannot claim what his grandfather had abandoned.

Ah but a descendant of a jew who abandoned property in Germany can claim, how special
BBC News - Nazi looted poster art must be returned to Peter Sachs

Obviously, the BBC thought it was special enough to publish an article about it. Perhaps if the Arabs had applied to Israeli courts for the return of or compensation for property they had proved they lost, the BBC would publish articles about those cases, too.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Of course that is a pantload.

In other words, you don't like it, but you have no specific criticism of it.

Three generations later, the grandchild of an Arab who left during the war cannot claim what his grandfather had abandoned.

They didn't abandon anything. They were run off at the point of a gun.

You know that's not true, but even if it were, they fact that they never applied to the Israeli government or courts to claim what rights they thought they had means they abandoned those rights. They didn't sue because that would have involved recognizing the sovereignty of the Israeli government and the jurisdiction of the Israeli courts in these matters and that would likely have branded them as collaborators in the eyes of other Arabs and gotten them killed.

 

[P F Tinmore]

It is all irrelevant. Even if we were to suppose 194 did establish a right of return, to claim that right some one who had left would have had to apply to the Israeli government or Israeli courts as an individual to be allowed to live in Israel or to claim his/her property or receive compensation for it. The Arabs who left did not do this, so they effectively abandoned whatever rights they may have had. Three generations later, the grandchild of an Arab who left during the war cannot claim what his grandfather had abandoned.

Ah but a descendant of a jew who abandoned property in Germany can claim, how special
BBC News - Nazi looted poster art must be returned to Peter Sachs

Obviously, the BBC thought it was special enough to publish an article about it. Perhaps if the Arabs had applied to Israeli courts for the return of or compensation for property they had proved they lost, the BBC would publish articles about those cases, too.

Why should they have to apply to foreigners to go back home?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Ah but a descendant of a jew who abandoned property in Germany can claim, how special
BBC News - Nazi looted poster art must be returned to Peter Sachs

Obviously, the BBC thought it was special enough to publish an article about it. Perhaps if the Arabs had applied to Israeli courts for the return of or compensation for property they had proved they lost, the BBC would publish articles about those cases, too.

Why should they have to apply to foreigners to go back home?

Once again, you have no substantial arguments to make, just mindless slurs against Israelis that you know have no basis in fact or logic.

 

[Jos]

Obviously, the BBC thought it was special enough to publish an article about it. Perhaps if the Arabs had applied to Israeli courts for the return of or compensation for property they had proved they lost, the BBC would publish articles about those cases, too.

Why should they have to apply to foreigners to go back home?

Once again, you have no substantial arguments to make, just mindless slurs against Israelis that you know have no basis in fact or logic.

I would say it was more like you who could find no "substantial arguments to make" concerning why Palestinians should ask the regime currently occupying their country for compensation, when what they want is the return of said property.
I dont think any former jewish residents of Nazi Germany approached the Nazi regime for compensation, which it seems did not exclude their claims once the regime had been "removed from the page of time"

 

[P F Tinmore]

Obviously, the BBC thought it was special enough to publish an article about it. Perhaps if the Arabs had applied to Israeli courts for the return of or compensation for property they had proved they lost, the BBC would publish articles about those cases, too.

Why should they have to apply to foreigners to go back home?

Once again, you have no substantial arguments to make, just mindless slurs against Israelis that you know have no basis in fact or logic.

Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants. Virtually all of its citizens were recent imports.

The native population was excluded.

Foreigners.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Why should they have to apply to foreigners to go back home?

Once again, you have no substantial arguments to make, just mindless slurs against Israelis that you know have no basis in fact or logic.

Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants. Virtually all of its citizens were recent imports.

The native population was excluded.

Foreigners.

And as you know, 80% of the Arabs west of the Jordan River in 1948 arrived there from the surrounding states after the British arrived; in your terms, foreigners.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Why should they have to apply to foreigners to go back home?

Once again, you have no substantial arguments to make, just mindless slurs against Israelis that you know have no basis in fact or logic.

I would say it was more like you who could find no "substantial arguments to make" concerning why Palestinians should ask the regime currently occupying their country for compensation, when what they want is the return of said property.
I dont think any former jewish residents of Nazi Germany approached the Nazi regime for compensation, which it seems did not exclude their claims once the regime had been "removed from the page of time"

Once again, you have no relevant arguments to make so you resort to anti semitic slurs by comparing Jews to nazis. Careful studies, mostly by Benny Morris, the man for whom the term, New Historians, was coined, show that only about 20% of the Arabs who left were driven out and that nearly all of these were from villages that had been attacking Jews on an ongoing basis since the Arab uprising of 1936.

According to most definitions a refugee is some why left his/her principal place of residence because of well founded fears for his/her safety, but existing records show that while some may have left out of fear, these fears were no well founded and that these people would have had nothing to fear from applying to the Israeli government or courts for permission to return or to claim the return of or compensation for property. These Arabs did have well founded fears that they would be murdered as collaborators if they did recognize the sovereignty of Israel or the jurisdiction of the Israeli courts by petitioning for what they believed were their rights.

 

[Hossfly]

Why should they have to apply to foreigners to go back home?

Once again, you have no substantial arguments to make, just mindless slurs against Israelis that you know have no basis in fact or logic.

Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants. Virtually all of its citizens were recent imports.

The native population was excluded.

Foreigners.

Can Tinmore tell us the native population of Arabs before the Jews came and eventually had jobs for Arabs so that they left their poor surrounding countries to come to Israel? After all, Winston Churchill reported on the slew of Arabs coming into Israel for jobs. I would imagine the British officials in the area reported on what was going on. I am sure Tinmore doesn't have to be a government official to notice how neighborhoods in the U.S. are changing.

The Jews took no one’s land

Read Joseph Farah's little article.

 

[Jos]

Once again, you have no substantial arguments to make, just mindless slurs against Israelis that you know have no basis in fact or logic.

I would say it was more like you who could find no "substantial arguments to make" concerning why Palestinians should ask the regime currently occupying their country for compensation, when what they want is the return of said property.
I dont think any former jewish residents of Nazi Germany approached the Nazi regime for compensation, which it seems did not exclude their claims once the regime had been "removed from the page of time"

Once again, you have no relevant arguments to make so you resort to anti semitic slurs by comparing Jews to nazis. Careful studies, mostly by Benny Morris, the man for whom the term, New Historians, was coined, show that only about 20% of the Arabs who left were driven out and that nearly all of these were from villages that had been attacking Jews on an ongoing basis since the Arab uprising of 1936.

According to most definitions a refugee is some why left his/her principal place of residence because of well founded fears for his/her safety, but existing records show that while some may have left out of fear, these fears were no well founded and that these people would have had nothing to fear from applying to the Israeli government or courts for permission to return or to claim the return of or compensation for property. These Arabs did have well founded fears that they would be murdered as collaborators if they did recognize the sovereignty of Israel or the jurisdiction of the Israeli courts by petitioning for what they believed were their rights.

so can the Palestinian refugees currently living in Lebanon apply to return to their fathers former homeland?

 

[Staidhup]

Like who gives a shit about the UN and their pathetic resolutions. I guess the world government oversight experiment failed, talk, talk, talk.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I would say it was more like you who could find no "substantial arguments to make" concerning why Palestinians should ask the regime currently occupying their country for compensation, when what they want is the return of said property.
I dont think any former jewish residents of Nazi Germany approached the Nazi regime for compensation, which it seems did not exclude their claims once the regime had been "removed from the page of time"

Once again, you have no relevant arguments to make so you resort to anti semitic slurs by comparing Jews to nazis. Careful studies, mostly by Benny Morris, the man for whom the term, New Historians, was coined, show that only about 20% of the Arabs who left were driven out and that nearly all of these were from villages that had been attacking Jews on an ongoing basis since the Arab uprising of 1936.

According to most definitions a refugee is some why left his/her principal place of residence because of well founded fears for his/her safety, but existing records show that while some may have left out of fear, these fears were no well founded and that these people would have had nothing to fear from applying to the Israeli government or courts for permission to return or to claim the return of or compensation for property. These Arabs did have well founded fears that they would be murdered as collaborators if they did recognize the sovereignty of Israel or the jurisdiction of the Israeli courts by petitioning for what they believed were their rights.

so can the Palestinian refugees currently living in Lebanon apply to return to their fathers former homeland?

Anyone who wants to can apply to emigrate to Israel. For non Jews, Israel's immigration laws are similar to other western democracies.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Once again, you have no substantial arguments to make, just mindless slurs against Israelis that you know have no basis in fact or logic.

Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants. Virtually all of its citizens were recent imports.

The native population was excluded.

Foreigners.

And as you know, 80% of the Arabs west of the Jordan River in 1948 arrived there from the surrounding states after the British arrived; in your terms, foreigners.

Got a link?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants. Virtually all of its citizens were recent imports.

The native population was excluded.

Foreigners.

And as you know, 80% of the Arabs west of the Jordan River in 1948 arrived there from the surrounding states after the British arrived; in your terms, foreigners.

Got a link?

Got a brain? We've been through this before.

 

[P F Tinmore]

And as you know, 80% of the Arabs west of the Jordan River in 1948 arrived there from the surrounding states after the British arrived; in your terms, foreigners.

Got a link?

Got a brain? We've been through this before.

The Arab population declined from about 93% at the turn of the century to about 65% by 1948.

That is some Arab immigration you have there.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Got a link?

Got a brain? We've been through this before.

The Arab population declined from about 93% at the turn of the century to about 65% by 1948.

That is some Arab immigration you have there.

You are profoundly dishonest. At the turn of the century, the territory of Palestine included what would become Trans Jordan, but by 1948, the territory of Palestine consisted only of the area west of the Jordan River. When you compare the population of the area that now includes Israel, the disputed territories and Jordan at the turn of the century with the population of the area west of the Jordan River in 1948, you are being intentionally deceitful because you understand that the facts do not support your positions. Once again, here are the facts.

According the the first British report to the League of Nations, there were about 76,000 Jews in the area west of the Jordan River and about 78,000 Arabs, but by 1948, the Arab population had jumped from 78,000 to 1,200,000, and increase of more than 1500%, a feat that would have been impossible to achieve in 27 years without massive Arab immigration into the area. In fact, studies of stable communities in the West Bank that experienced no economic development and thus attracted few Arab immigrants showed the increase in population from 1922 to 1944 to be no more than 70%, meaning that without Arab immigration, the total Arab population west of the Jordan River would have been no greater than 132,600 by 1944 and only slightly greater than that four years later in 1948 and that more than 90% of the Arabs living west of the Jordan River in 1948 arrived after the British did.

Jewish population growth during the same period was also due largely to immigration but not on as massive scale as Arab immigration. Approximately two Arabs arrived for each Jew that did, and this explains why in 1948 there were approximately two Arabs living west of the Jordan River for each Jew who lived there. Bottom line, in your terms, over 83% of the people, both Arabs and Jews, living west of the Jordan River in 1948 were "foreigners".

An Interim Report on the Civil Administration of Palestine to the League of Nations, June 1921

The Immigration of Egyptian Workers to the land of Israel during the British Mandate/ DR.Rivka Shpak Lissak | Rivka Shpak Lissak