Menu
The best way to present the facts concerning this question is by asking the following questions:
- Are you aware that Palestine's Jewish population was under 8% of the total population as of 1914? (Righteous Victims, p. 83) It should be noted that the mass majority of the Jews residing in Palestine were not citizens of the country, but they recently fled anti-Semitic Tsarist Russia.
-
Are you aware that in 1914 Jewish land ownership in Palestine was under 2%?
-
Despite the active British assistance to establish a "Jewish National home" in Palestine (based on the British commitment in the Balfour Declaration), Palestine's Jewish population in 1947 was increased to 33% of its total population. (Righteous Victims, p. 83). Click here for a map illustrating Palestine's population distribution per district as of 1946. Again, prior to the 1948 war less than one third of the Jews in Palestine were recognized as legal citizens by the Government of Palestine (Survey of Palestine P. 208), however, they mostly maintained citizenship of their respective countries, such as Russian, Polish, Romanian, and Germany citizenships.
Browse hundreds of pictures showing Palestinians being ethnically cleansed from their homes
It's worth noting that even after five decades of ethnic cleansing, occupation, and dispossession, the demographic ratio between Palestinians (8.5 million) and Israeli Jews (4.5-5 million) is still the same as it was in December 1947, which was (and still is) 2 to 1 in favor of the Palestinian people. However, for Israel to maintain its democratic "Jewish state", and above all its "Jewish character", it opted to ETHNICALLY CLEANSE 80% of the Palestinian people out of their homes, farms, businesses.
- Are you aware that Jewish land ownership in Palestine was under 7% as of 1947? (Benny Morris, p. 170) Click here for a map illustrating Palestine's land ownership per district as of 1945.
-
Are you aware that most of the European states who favored partition recently ganged upon their Jewish citizens, and wished to rid themselves of those unwanted citizens? Actually, many of those nations welcomed handing their Jewish citizens to the SS and few stuck their necks out to protect them! This odd political realities was predicted by Theodor Herzl (the founder of Zionism) some 50 years earlier when he wrote: antisemites will become Zionist Jews' best allies! The sad political reality implied a political suicide for those nations' leaders to vote against partition even if they weren't antisemitic; plus bring upon them the wrath of the Zionist lobby. Therefore, to vote for partition was the path of maximum gains and the path of least resistance.
Just to give the reader a prospective on how Europeans felt about their Jewish citizens post WWII, David Ben-Gurion noted that in recent Gallup Poll in 1947 taken in the American Zone of Germany: 14% of the Germans questioned had condemned Hitler's massacre of the Jews, 26% had been "neutral", and 60% had approved the killings. (Israel: A History, p. 147). Of course Jews’ situation was much worse in Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, other eastern European nations and even in France (which gave birth to Zionism after the infamous Dreyfus Affair). Therefore, love it or hate, European antisemitism was exploited to the teeth by Zionist Jews; which is a fact that continues to be weaponized against Palestinians to this date; are you surprised?
In a nutshell, those states (which voted for partition) were made-up of a strange coalition whose interests collided; yes many were antisemites, but also they include states who felt guilty for how Jews were treated! Of course, Palestinians had no voice & by default they were the weakest party; that's why they were escape goated! In odd perverted fait; Zionist Jews now portray Palestinians as the New Antisemites; and those who ganged upon their families got a free pass!
Finally on this note, Palestinians ask: what if UN’s vote happened in 1937, how Hitler would've voted? It should be noted that Haavara Agreement was in effect between 1933-39, and both (Nazis & Zionists) had every incentive in removing German Jews out of Germany; and both worked together & profited handsomely! Nazis broke the boycott & stimulated their economy; and Zionists got a new influx of wealthy & educate European Jewish immigrants whom they taxed at 45% of their assets value upon their arrival to Haifa!
-
Are you aware that the United States of America arm twisted the arms of dozens of small nations to get their support for the partitioning of Palestine? For example, Greece and France were threatened with a foreign aid cutoff, Liberia was threatened with a rubber embargo plus Firestone Company's president threatened to revoke his company's planned expansion in Liberia, bribing several Latin American countries by hinting at the possibility that the U.S. might fund the construction of a Pan-American highway, ... etc. (Righteous Victims p. 184, Jerusalem Post, and America And The Founding Of Israel p. 141-143).
Browse hundreds of pictures showing Zionists Jews looting Palestinian properties
On this point, it is worth quoting President Truman to give the reader how intenss the pressure campaign was in favor of voting for partition:
"The facts were that not only were there pressure movements around the United Nations unlike anything that had been seen there before, but that the White House, too, was subjected to a constant barrage. I do not think I ever had as much pressure and propaganda aimed at the White House as I had in this instance. The persistence of a few of the extreme Zionist leaders--actuated by political motives and engaging in political threats--disturbed and annoyed me." (American Presidents and the Middle East. Duke University Press p. 157. )
- Are you aware that two US Supreme Court justices, Frank Murphy and Felix Frankfurter, contacted the Philippine's ambassador in Washington D.C. and sent telegrams to the Philippine's president, Manuel Roxas, warning that a vote against the proposed partition plan would alienate millions of Americans. Ten senators also cabled Roxas (Jerusalem Post).
- Are you aware that the Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru spoke with anger and contempt for the way the UN vote had been lined up? He said the Zionists had tried to bribe India with millions and at the same time his sister, Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, the Indian ambassador to the UN, had received daily warnings that her life was in danger unless "she voted right".
- Are you aware that the Jewish Agency budgeted a million dollars for its own bribery campaign? The money allocation appeared in the Jewish Agency's budget as "irregular political activity." (One Palestine Complete, p. 496)
-
Are you aware that the Zionist leaders enjoyed a clandestine advantage by BUGGING the rooms of the UN Special Committee On Palestine (UNSCOP), and they knew what every committee member and witness was saying? (Righteous Victims, p. 182)
- Are you aware that in March 1948 the United States, along with China and France, was withdrawing from its earlier commitments to partition Palestine, and was pressing for "trusteeship" - an extension of Great Power rule- in Palestine beyond May 15th, 1948? (Benny Morris, p. 61) And on March 19th, 1948, Ben-Gurion responded to theidea of UN trusteeship in a press conference in Tel-Aviv with as follows:
"It is we who will decide the fate of Palestine. We cannot agree to any sort of Trusteeship, permanent or temporary. The Jewish State exists because we defend it." (Israel: A History, p. 165)
It should be noted that since November 1947 the UN GA has failed to reaffirm the 1947 UN GA proposed partition plan.
-
Are you aware that the 20th Zionist Congress, which convened in Zurich in August 1937, almost UNANIMOUSLY REJECTED the British proposed partition plan of Palestine (which became known as the Peel Commission Partition plan)? (Israel: A History, p. 88, and One Palestine Complete, p. 414). Although the proposed Peel Commission's partition plan was rejected because the areas allocated to the "Jewish state" was "too small," the concept of partitioning the country was adopted by the 20th Zionist Congress. Click here to view the map proposed by the Peel Commission which was rejected by the 20th Zionist Congress, and click here to view a map proposed by the U.N. GA in 1947 for the partition of Palestine. While inspecting both maps, note the following:
Browse hundreds of pictures depecting Palestinian culture
1) The Jewish population in Palestine as of 1937 was under 27% of the total population.
2) The Jewish population in Palestine as of 1947 was under 33% of the total population.
3) The Negev Desert was populated with Zionist Jews only in few isolated colonies.
4) The Peel Commission allocated the most fertile regions of Palestine to the "Jewish state," which included all of Galilee and a much wider area in the coastal region compared to the areas proposed by the UN GA in 1947.
5) The 1947 UN GA proposed Partition plan did not advocate compulsory population transfer (ethnic cleansing) for Palestinians out of the areas allocated to the "Jewish State", where Palestinians made up 45% of the total population. On the contrary, compulsory population transfer was a major pillar for the success of the Peel Commission Partition plan.
We call upon your sense of fairness while contemplating the following questions:
1) If the Peel Commission plan had been accepted by the Zionists in 1937, how many Jews might have been saved from the Nazi holocaust? In that respect, it's worth quoting Ben-Gurion, who wrote twenty years later:
"Had partition [referring to the Peel Commission partition plan] been carried out, the history of our people would have been different and six million Jews in Europe would not have been killed---most of them would be in Israel" (One Palestine Complete, p. 414).
2) Why the rejection of the 1937 Peel Partition plan is justifiable according to many Zionists, but the Arabs' rejection of the 1947 UN GA Partition plan is not?
- To give a different perspective on the issue, it's worth contemplating what Moshe Sharett, the 1st Israeli Foreign Minister, said in justification of why the Palestinian people would reject any Partition to their country. Sharett stated behind closed doors to the Zionist Actions Committee on April 22nd, 1937:
"...in contrast to us they [Palestinian Arabs] would lose totally that part of Palestine which they consider to be an Arab country and are fighting to keep it such ... They would lose the richest part of Palestine [referring Peel Commission Partition plan]; they would lose major Arab assets, the orange plantations, the commercial and industrial centers and the most important sources of revenue for their government which would become impoverished; they would lose most of the coastal area, which would also be loss to the hinterland [Palestinian] Arab states. .... This would be such an uprooting, such a shock, the likes of which had never occurred and could drown the whole thing in rivers of blood. " (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 59-60), click here to read the full quote.
- Are you aware that the Syrian proposal to refer the Palestine issue to the International Court of Justice at The Hague was defeated by a single vote, twenty one votes against twenty. (Simha Flapan, p. 123)
- Are you aware that the 1947 UN GA proposed partition was outside the competence of the Assembly under the Charter of the United Nations? Nowhere in the UN's charter was there the power to partition any country, especially based on racial or religious grounds. Even if the UN had the power, the resolution to partition Palestine was not binding since it was indorsed by the General Assembly rather than the Security Council.
- Notwithstanding the above facts, are you aware that the 1947 UN GA proposed partition granted the "Jewish state" ABOUT 60% of the total area of Palestine?
-
Assuming that you are an American, based on the above facts, would you concede sovereignty and land ownership over 60% of your country to a foreign minority, such as Canadians and Mexicans, who owns under 7% of U.S.'s lands & make 11% of citizens? Click here for a map illustrating such comparative partition of the U.S. in favor of one of its ethnic or religious minorities.
UN Partition Applied to US
If you do not accept such a plan for yourself as an American, then
Why ask the Palestinian people to concede 60% of their land in favor of an ALIEN foreign minority?
Humor us: Why Palestinians wouldn't welcome such a partition of the US even if Americans (who are big Zionists supporters) pay the price! Doesn't that explain how Europeans felt when they voted for partition! Isn't obivous that most nations who voted for partition they were cynical & wished to rid themselves of their Jewish population!
- For a moment, let's assume that the above arguments and facts are nonsense to the average Israeli and Zionist, and ask the following question:
Assuming that as of 1947 Israeli Jews constituted a 2/3 majority of the total population, 89% of citizens, owned and operated 93% of Israel's lands, and contributed 55%-60% of the Israeli Gross Domestic Product (GDP), would you accept a U.N. IMPOSED partition of Israel in favor of an alien minority?
It should be NOTED that currently Palestinian-Israeli citizens make up 20-22% of the total Israeli population, so is it acceptable for the U.N. to partition Israel in a favorable way to its Palestinian-Israeli minority? As an Israeli Jew, would you accept a UN GA imposed partition of your country?
We cannot help it but to a draw similarity with a famous Old Testament story, when two women disputed the motherhood of a baby. They took their dispute to King Solomon, who decided to settle the dispute by cutting the baby in half. The baby's mother quickly objected the King's decision and preferred giving up that baby rather than killing it. That is when the wise King recognized that she must be the mother, and the other woman is an imposter. In a similar fashion, the Palestinian people refused the unjust resolution that called for the division of their country with an alien colonizers.
-
Dr. Walid Khalidi articulated the Palestinians position as follows:
"The native people of Palestine, like the native people of every other country in the Arab world, Asia, Africa and Europe, refused to divide the land with a settler community."
Browse this gellary that shows hundreds of Palestinian land deeds that proves land ownership
- In a letter Chaim Weizmann sent to the Palestine-British high Commissioner, while the Peel Commission was convening in 1937, he stated:
"We shall spread in the whole country in the course of time ..... this is only an arrangement for the next 25 to 30 years." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 66)
-
Ben-Gurion emphasized that the acceptance of the Peel Commission would not imply static borders for the future "Jewish state". In a letter Ben-Gurion sent to his son in 1937, he wrote:
"No Zionist can forgo the smallest portion of the Land Of Israel. [A] Jewish state in part [of Palestine] is not an end, but a beginning ..... Our possession is important not only for itself ... through this we increase our power, and every increase in power facilitates getting hold of the country in its entirety. Establishing a [small] state .... will serve as a very potent lever in our historical effort to redeem the whole country." (Righteous Victims, p. 138)
-
In 1938, Ben-Gurion made it clear of his support for the "Jewish state" on part of Palestine was only as a stepping ground for a complete conquest. He wrote:
"[I am] satisfied with part of the country, but on the basis of the assumption that after we build up a strong force following the establishment of the state--we will abolish the partition of the country and we will expand to the whole Land of Israel." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 107 & One Palestine Complete, p. 403)
-
One day after the UN vote to partition Palestine, Menachem Begin, the commander of the Irgun gang and Israel's future Prime Minister between 1977-1983, proclaimed:
"The Partition of Palestine is illegal. It will never be recognized .... Jerusalem was and will for ever be our capital. Eretz Israel will be restored to the people of Israel. All of it. And for Ever." (Iron Wall p. 25)
-
Ben-Gurion was happy and sad when the U.N. voted to partition Palestine into two states, Palestinian and Jewish. He was happy because "finally" Jews could have a "country" of their own. On the other hand, he was sad because they have "lost" almost half of Palestine, and because they would have to contend with a sizable Palestinian minority, well over 45% of the total population. In the following few quotes, you will see how he also stated that a "Jewish state" cannot survive being 60% Jewish; implying that something aught to be done to remedy the so called "Arab demographic problem". He stated on November 30, 1947:
"In my heart, there was joy mixed with sadness: joy that the nations at last acknowledged that we are a nation with a state, and sadness that we lost half of the country, Judea and Samaria, and , in addition, that we [would] have [in our state] 400,000 [Palestinian] Arabs." (Righteous Victims, p. 190)
-
While addressing the Central Committee of the Histadrut on December 30, 1947, Ben-Gurion stated:
"In the area allocated to the Jewish State there are not more than 520,000 Jews and about 350,000 non-Jews, mostly Arabs. Together with the Jews of Jerusalem, the total population of the Jewish State at the time of its establishment, will be about one million, including almost 40% non-Jews. such a [population] composition does not provide a stable basis for a Jewish State. This [demographic] fact must be viewed in all its clarity and acuteness. With such a [population] composition, there cannot even be absolute certainty that control will remain in the hands of the Jewish majority .... There can be no stable and strong Jewish state so long as it has a Jewish majority of only 60%." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 176)
-
Ben-Gurion commented on the proposed Peel Commission Partition plan as follows in 1937:
Browse thousands pre-Nakba pictures
"We must EXPEL ARABS and take their places .... and, if we have to use force-not to dispossess the Arabs of the Negev and Transjordan, but to guarantee our own right to settle in those places-then we have force at our disposal." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 66). Note the premeditated plan to ethnically cleanse the Negev and Transjordan which were not allocated to the Jewish State by the Peel Commission, click here to view a map illustrating the areas allocated to the "Jewish State" by the Peel Commission in 1937.
-
Moshe Sharett, director of the Jewish Agency's Political Department who later became Israel's first foreign minister, declared:
"[W]hen the Jewish state is established--it is very possible that the result will be [population] transfer of [the Palestinian] Arabs." (Righteous Victims, p. 254)
- While addressing the Central Committee of the Histadrut on December 30th, 1947, Ben-Gurion said:
"In the area allocated to the Jewish State there are not more than 520,000 Jews and about 350,000 non-Jews, mostly Arabs. Together with the Jews of Jerusalem, the total population of the Jewish State at the time of its establishment, will be about one million, including almost 40% non-Jews. such a [population] composition does not provide a stable basis for a Jewish State. This [demographic] fact must be viewed in all its clarity and acuteness. With such a [population] composition, there cannot even be absolute certainty that control will remain in the hands of the Jewish majority .... There can be no stable and strong Jewish state so long as it has a Jewish majority of only 60%."(Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 176 & Benny Morris p. 28)
- On February 7th, 1948, while addressing the Mapai Council he responded to a remark that the "Jews have no land in the Jerusalem corridor" with the following:
"The war will give us the land. The concept of 'ours' and 'not ours' are only concepts for peacetime, and during war they lose all their meaning." (Benny Morris, p. 170 & Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 180)
- And on February 8th, 1948 Ben-Gurion also stated to the Mapai Council:
"From your entry into Jerusalem, through Lifta, Romema [East Jerusalem Palestinian neighborhood]. . . there are no [Palestinian] Arabs. One hundred percent Jews. Since Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans, it has not been Jewish as it is now. In many [Palestinian] Arab neighborhoods in the west one sees not a single [Palestinian] Arab. I do not assume that this will change. . . .What had happened in Jerusalem. . . . is likely to happen in many parts of the country. . . in the six, eight, or ten months of the campaign there will certainly be great changes in the composition of the population in the country." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 180-181)
- In a speech addressing the Zionist Action Committee on April 6, 1948, Ben-Gurion clearly stated that war could be used as an instrument to solve the so called "Arab demographic problem". He stated:
"We will not be able to win the war if we do not, during the war, populate upper and lower, eastern and western Galilee, the Negev and Jerusalem area, even if only in an artificial way, in a military way. . . . I believe that war will also bring in its wake a great change in the distribution of [Palestinian] Arab population." (Benny Morris, p. 181 & Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 181)
Note the premeditated plan to occupy and ethically cleanse areas, such as Galilee and Jerusalem, which were not allotted to the "Jewish State" by the 1947 UN GA Partition plan. Click here to view a map illustrating the areas allocated to the "Jewish State" by the 1947 UN GA partition plan.
Browse hundreds of pictures showing Israeli destruction of Palestinian homes
"I don't understand your optimism.," Ben-Gurion declared. "Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it's true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti-Semitism the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that? They may perhaps forget in one or two generations' time, but for the moment there is no chance. So it's simple: we have to stay strong and maintain a powerful army. Our whole policy is there. Otherwise the Arabs will wipes us out".
I was stunned by this pessimism, but he went on:
"I will be seventy years old soon. Well, Nahum, if you asked me whether I shall die and be buried in a Jewish state I would tell you Yes; in ten years, fifteen years, I believe there will still be a Jewish state. But ask me whether my son Amos, who will be fifty at the end of this year, has a chance of dying and being buried in a Jewish state, and I would answer: fifty-fifty.""But how can you sleep with that prospect in mind," I broke in, "and be Prime Minister of Israel too?"
"Who says I sleep? he answered simply". (The Jewish Paradox by Nahum Goldman, p. 99)
Finally, it's hypocritical when on one hand Zionists use UN GA partition plan as a pretext to legitimize Israel's existence,
while they've rejected almost every other UN resolution since Israel's creation, chief among them UN GA resolution 194 that called for the immediate return to all Palestinian refugees to their homes in Israel. To suit Zionists' political agenda, they have deliberately chosen to ignore most, if not all, of UN resolutions concerning Palestine and its people, of course with the exception of withdrawing from occupied southern Lebanon in May 2000. Sadly, Israel has accepted that UN resolution not because it was influenced by a UN, a U.S., or even a European diplomatic pressure, but because it was compelled to do so by the heroic Lebanese resistance.
Over 700 Oral History interviews (including 3,500+ hours of recording) can be viewed online.
Post Your Comment
*It should be NOTED that your email address won't be shared, and all communications between members will be routed via the website's mail server.
It wouldn't matter if there were supposedly 3 million different "Arab states". Palestinians were expelled from their land, that's all that matters here. Also this ridiculous claim that Khazarian Slavic speaking (see Eran Elhaik, Shlomo Sand, and Paul Wexler) hasbarists like "mtrink" try to peddle is trying to falsely assert that supposedly "Arabs" are all allegedly "the same". When anyone how knows anything, about anything, will easily be aware that the term "Arab" is a cultural and linguistic grouping. And there is a vast array of all kinds of different people who are thus termed "Arab"; who have very little in common. Sometimes there local dialects of the Arabic language are so different they can't even understand one another!
Also trolls like "mtrink" and co. never do explain how exactly the Zionist apartheid regime is supposedly a "Jewish state". The Zionist apartheid regime is only a supposed "Jewish state" in one way; that is it discriminates against those the Zionist regime whimsically defines as "non-Jews". While then granting immediate "citizenship" and privileges to foreigners this same regime also likewise whimsically defines: except this time as "Jews". Judaism is a religion and not a supposed race, a simple fact there that Nazi and Zio-Nazi racists have a hard time accepting.
1. The reason Jews formed only one third of the population in 1947 was that the 1939 White Paper stopped would be refugees from Nazi persecution and later the survivors of the Holocaust from going to Palestine and making their home there.
2. My understanding is that it was the Palestinian Arabs who rejected the partition proposal of the Peel Commission. The Zionists accepted it as a basis for further negotiation.
3. All the comments I have seen posted are favourable to your position. I suggest a healthy debate would be more democratic, provided it is courteous and respectful.
"Palestine, therefore, was not partitioned in 1921–1922. Transjordan was not excised but, on the contrary, added to the mandatory area. Zionism was barred from seeking to expand there – but the Balfour Declaration had never previously applied to the area east of the Jordan. Why is this important? Because the myth of Palestine's 'first partition' has become part of the concept of 'Greater Israel' and of the ideology of Jabotinsky's Revisionist movement." Wasserstein, Bernard (2004). Israel and Palestine: Why They Fight and Can They Stop?, pp. 105–106.
Again on the "Balfour Declaration" of 1917 CE itself (by the British Empire to Baron Rothschild again) note that even this colonialist British Empire document stated to the Zionist movement that "it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine" the Nakba clearly violated this.
You see many times these same Khazarian ziofascist propagandists will bring up the British Empire's colonialist 1917 CE "Balfour Declaration" that then British Empire foreign secretary Arthur James Balfour wrote to the usurious Khazarian Rothschild Zionist bankster family of Europe (the Rothschilds provided the key financial support behind Khazarian/Khazar Zionist colonialism from Europe). These Khazar propagandists, humorously are find with using something from the colonialist British Empire (who along with the colonial French divided up the Middle East between themselves following WW1: i.e. see the Sykes-Picot Agreement, the earlier Hussein-McMahon Correspondence, etc. etc.) because they say "see the British said they supported our 'Jewish state'" (how a SECULAR apartheid Khazarian ziofascist entity is supposedly a "Jewish state" is beyond any rational person!). But then these same Khazar ziofascist clowns will turn around and whine about the British issuing the Transjordan memorandum of 1922; which did officially split off modern Jordan from the British Mandate of Palestine and gave it to the Hashemites of Makkah (who had again lost out to the other British puppet ibn Saud and the Saudi family in the Arabian Peninsula, in this case specifically the Holy City of Makkah, itself) as the Emirate of Transjordan again. But if the Zionist clowns are fine and say the British supposedly have the "right" to issue the colonialist Balfour Declaration of 1917, how can they then turn around and whine about the British making another "decision" with the Transjordan memorandum of 1922?! Of course logical consistency, accurate history, and the FACTS have never been of interest to the Khazarian ziofascist LIARS and propagandist agents!
Again note in the classical Islamic period, the Caliphates (Umayyad and then Abbasid) did have separate military districts (known in Arabic as "Jund") of Jund Filastin (Palestine) and Jund Al-Urdunn (Jordan); again separate districts there.
And on the British Empire's colonialist "Balfour Declaration" of 1917 CE. This document, while offering colonialist British occupier "support" to the Zionist colonization movement, itself even made clear declarations such as telling the Zionists (right after noting their "support" for Zionist colonization) "it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"
The Zionists obviously violated this entirely when they committed the atrocities of the Nakba against the indigenous Palestinian people.
Johns Hopkins University geneticist Dr. Eran Elhaik "The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses" Oxford University Press
Genome Biol Evol (2013) 5 (1): 61-74.
First published online: December 14, 2012
© The Author(s) 2012. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution.
As for you trying/attempting to touch on the history of the Emirate of Transjordan, which became the modern Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan: this is entirely separate from the issue (or as the British called it the "question" or "problem") of Palestine.
Yes after defeating the Ottoman Empire in WW1, when the colonialist British and French were dividing up the post-WW1 Middle East between themselves (the Sykes-Picot Agreement, etc) the British Empire's British Mandate of Palestine did originally include both historic Palestine and what soon became the Emirate of Transjordan aka today the modern Hashemite monarchy Jordan: as one entity together. However, even this is despite the fact that in the classical Islamic period, for example, Jund Filastin and Jund al-Urdunn were two separate districts of the Islamic Caliphate. The British Empire (busy as usual trying to juggle it's many pawns/"allies" in the Middle East region at this point: such as the Zionist movement, the Hashemite of Makkah, ibn Saud and the House of Saud, etc) needed a place to move their Hashemite pawns (or "allies) that had rebelled for the British against the Ottomans in WW1 but who had then "lost out" in the Arabian Peninsula itself to the House of Saud (that then went about forming the modern: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in the Arabian Peninsula itself) so the British moved the Hashemites of Makkah to what is today Jordan and was then called the Emirate of Transjordan.
The main bulk of the Zionist movement didn't complain about this at all, as there were NO Jews in Jordan at all and very few even in historic Palestine at that point! The only Zionists that "complained" were the then emergent splinter group led by Vladimir Jabotinsky that came to be known as the "Revisionist Zionist Movement" aka Revisionist Zionists; whose birth was because of the British Empire's Transjordan memorandum of 1922. The Revisionist Zionist movement sought their colonialist scheme "on both sides of the Jordan River"; and as such then claimed the British supposedly had "robbed" them of Jordan! It was from this that the modern, pathetic, Zionist memes (of people like the Khazar MORON Danny Ayalon) came about that you supposedly "already sacrificed and 'gave up' Jordan!". When anyone connected with reality (unlike a Khazarian like you, see Johns Hopkins University geneticist Dr. Eran Elhaik again! Who confirmed the correctness of Dr. Shlomo Sand), can see the history of the formation of the Emirate of Transjordan and today's Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan is a totally SEPARATE history all-together from the question of Palestine. Which the British had to still struggle with up till 1948 itself, i.e. the unfair UNGA Resolution 181, etc. etc. etc.
To close, some very interesting history on the formation of modern Jordan under the Hashemite monarchy (again a separate historical topic then the Palestine question) can be seen by looking up the Kura Rebellion and the Al-Adwan Rebellion.
...
Kura Rebellion was among the first uprisings against the British mandate and the authority of emir Abdullah in Transjordan. The rebellion, begun in 1921, under the slogan "Jordan for Jordanians", resulted in minor casualties and was at first pacified via negotiations and amnesty by the Hashemite ruler, but erupted again in 1923. The second insurrection of sheikh Kulaib al-Shurayda was crushed with the support of the British RAF.
...
Adwan Rebellion or the Balqa Revolt[1] was the largest uprising against the British mandate and the newly installed Transjordanian government, headed by Mezhar Ruslan, during its first years. The rebellion was initiated in the early months of 1923, under the slogan "Jordan for Jordanians", but was quickly crushed with the assistance of the British RAF. As a result, the revolt leader, Sultan al-Adwan, fled to Syria with his sons.[1]
what distresses me is that people forcibly evicted and/or who left where they lived for a variety of reasons typically resettle some where else and commence (themselves or their children) to rebuild their lives. Essentially they integrate into the country or area where they ended up and start over and rebuild and re establish their prior life.
however, in the case of the palestinian refugees, while they would go into adjoining countries (and thus shared a similar culture, religion and language) they were not permitted to rebild their lives but rather penned up for generations in refugee camps where they lived a dystopian depressing life.
why were they not permitted to integrate into the normal life style in the adjoining countries? i am sure we all know the answer. it was the cruel and callous political decision of the rulers of the adjoining countries to keep them penned up so as to maintain for generations the feelings of hatred, despair, envy. The effect was to make sure that successor generations would always be devoted to "return" because essentially they had nothing else to do and little else to look forward to.
palestinians refugees who for example immigrated to the USA or Canada in probably a high majority of cases (i have no actual percentages) ended up as either professionals such as doctors (clearly they are not dunb) or often as small businessman running thir own businesses. i have talked to many and consistently they stated that it was best to leave the camps and go to a place where they would be permitted to strive and succeed.
Then I read what TS wrote and he sums it all up quite the way I would.
By the way Brent you are an excellent writer. I on the other hand am not so I apologize in advance if this doesn't flow all that well or is hard to follow.
1) The UN Partition plan did not contemplate giving the Jews property ownership rights in lands owned by Arabs or visa-versa; all it did was give each side sovereignty (i.e. the right to rule) over certain territories.
2) Palestine was ruled by the Brits and it is was therefore their right to give whoever they wanted the right to rule the land. For example, if I own property in Alaska, and the US decides to give Mexico the right to rule Alaska then I now own a piece of land in Mexico or in a territory controlled by Mexico. What caused the angst regarding the resolution was not the giving and taking of property rights but rather the fact that the Jews did a better job of convincing the UN to give/gift them the right to rule certain portions of territory. Again, this was a “gift”, in reality the Brits didn't HAVE to give anyone anything.
3) When the Jews agreed to the partition, which the Arabs felt was favorable to the Jews (again because they did a better job convincing the UN – some say they along with they US used unscrupulous tactics, but as we all know, such is politics) the Arab countries got upset, didn't sign onto the partition and a war broke out. When the dust settled the Jews had conquered territories and expanded their land beyond what was called for in the UN partition plan. By the way there have been numerous Arab leaders who have since said that not agreeing to the partition was a mistake.
4) The "wars" now take us into the arena of actual loss of land (i.e. property rights). I can assure you that had the Arab countries won the wars there would currently not be an Israel. In any event, the Jews won and conquered certain territories and took certain land away from the people with whom they were fighting. Arguments can be made regarding the legality of the taking of landownership, how it was done, etc., but that is a very different discussion then “the right to govern certain territory”. As an aside, when people get conquered and expelled from a territory because they have lost a war they typically don't get their property rights back in the land/territory. Sometimes they get compensation from governmental entities that rule the land but they rarely get their property rights back without a war or peaceful exchange. It would be far fetched to believe that after the wars a Palestinian would be able to walk back to his house on XYZ street and kick out the people who know lived there...historically not realistic, doesn't happen.
5) Lastly, we fast forward to today. The Palestinians want the land back that was taken from them via battle; a battle which was started because the Arab countries didn't like what the Brits (via the UN) elected to do with the land they controlled. So now, there are people, the Palestinians, refugees, who have lost there homes and are now forced to live in horrible conditions (like many other refugees around the world). This is an atrocity, it is sad, terrible, inhumane… but, the problem is that many Palestinians, at least the ones with power, would say that they want their land back and more importantly sovereignty over a large portion of if not the entire territory. This in turn puts Israel in a precarious position because if the Palestinians want ALL OR ALMOST all the land back and sovereignty over the territory then they can only obtain their goal by eliminating Israel, which means the Palestinians will be a threat to Israel essentially forever. With this looming over its head it forces Israel to take extreme measures, blockades etc. to make sure that the Palestinians don’t to obtain materials, weapons, and other capabilities that will allow them to pose a threat to Israel’s existence. So now you have a people, the Palestinians, Gaza “under siege”, and although the things that are being done to the people are beyond the pale unless the Palestinians (those in power) can accept the fact that the Brits had the right to do whatever they wanted with the land they governed, and accept that they will never get back the entire territory peacefully, there will be unrest in the area….at least until one side is sadly eliminated.
My guess is that the Arab countries would say that the Brits had no right to give anyone anything as it pertains to Palestine. If that is the argument then it is time to dive deep into the history books and decide who was where when, who conquered who, and what actually gives someone the right to rule a territory.
In any event, this page is devoted to the UN partition plan and if the argument is that it was always Arab controlled land then most of what is on this page can be deleted.
I look forward to a response as I mostly wrote so someone can explain to me what I am missing or why my logic is flawed.
And "Israel" is not a "democracy" it is an apartheid entity, with rampant discrimination not just against Palestinians but against Ethiopians, Arab Jews, etc. etc. And even though it is completely off-topic, you throw out a random claim that as an atheist you supposedly oppose what you claim are alleged "misogynists"?? I'm guessing you just mean religious people here (i.e. your attempted slandering claims). You do realize the current Zionist regime of Benjamin Mileikowsky (aka "Netanyahu") is only in power because of the right wing "Shas" coalition in "Israel" led by "Rabbi" Ovadia Yosef who openly states that "goyim" (aka "gentiles") have no purpose for existing other than to "serve Jews" and that Jews will "sit like an effendi and eat" while "gentiles" again serve them. Even "jpost" reported Ovadia Yosef's comments there.
Atheists, like yourself, who are propagandists for the Zionist entity are especially ridiculous to observe; as you apparently "support" an entity that BASES itself on various false mythological RELIGIOUS claims chief of which is that they are supposedly the "Biblical Israelites" blah blah blah. So you literally are supporting the ultimate "theocracy" in the region; who claim a DEITY "gave them the land", and they are that allegedly that Deity's supposed "chosen people", etc etc!! Of course it is one (of many) humorous contradictions in the Zionist's own ideology that they bring up all these claims of "the Torah says this is our land" etc. but then they mostly have a secular European inspired law code (i.e. they are mostly European colonists) even though the right wing (like Ovadia Yosef, a kingmaker who was crucial in putting "Netanyahu" in power) is increasingly powerful in the Zionist entity and wants to bring actual "Old Testament" law into place!
Regarding the clown "hynzerelli" from back in October 2011; it seems this hack was trying to push social darwinism or something. It seems he fits in well with Adolf Hitler and the Nazis and their racism/eugenics and "survival of the fittest" nonsense! But I'm sure when that comes up he retorts "No the Nazis were horrible!" I've encountered many of these same vile douchebags when defending the rights of Native Americans, you run across people who actually PRAISE the genocide of Native Americans as claiming that it allegedly brought about "good" supposedly (with Europeans ruling the land, with their African slaves of course!). But just think of the outcry if someone said "I think Nazi Germany was good, they invented a lot of things like the autobahn freeway system, the Volkswagen cars, the V2 rocket, the first computer made by German Konrad Zuse, and much more" this person would be AUTOMATICALLY shouted down and castigated beyond believe in public! Yet the fact of the Nazis prowess in science, technology, etc. is undeniable; yet that doesn't matter when we are discussing them! It is clearly as they say unfortunately that "history" (his-STORY) is all too often "the propaganda of the victor" and since most Native Americans are dead and were killed off there is nobody protecting them (just see the US with insulting sports team names like the "Redskins"!) But since the "Allies" won WWII (putting aside the war criminals like Winston Churchill of England who slaughtered millions of Indian people in British colonized India. And the US war criminal regime that dropped nuclear bombs massacring the unarmed civilian women and children of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Japan), nobody even is allowed to acknowledge Nazi German inventions, etc. without being claimed to be secretly "excusing the Nazis crimes", etc. Again the official "history" (his-STORY again) is all too often simply the "propaganda of the VICTOR".
Also one last point for "hynzerelli", nationalism is a very modern phenomenon in world history that most academics say only developed in the late 18th century CE in Europe! So hacks like you who try to bring up modern day nationalist ideology are completely retarded and trying to force modern ideologies and terminologies on the ancient past of Empires, city states, absolute monarchs, and clans. Also this "hynzerelli" parrots the VERY COMMON, completely FALLACIOUS and wrong claim and assertion that the land of Palestine was allegedly only called and termed Palestine by the Romans who made that the name (allegedly in the 1st century CE going by this Zionist and their associates silly/false propaganda). All one needs to do is go to the Wikipedia article "Timeline of the name Palestine". In that article (with full academic sources noted, used and cited) it mentions how the name Palestine goes back as FAR as 1150 BCE at inscriptions found at the Medinet Habu temple complex in Luxor, Egypt which is the burial site and shrine of Ancient Egyptian Pharaoh Ramesses III (who reigned from 1186 BCE- 1155 BCE in Ancient Egypt). At this Medinet Habu temple it mentions Pharaoh Ramesses III defeating the invasion of part of Egypt by the "Sea Peoples" and one of them that is mentioned as coming out of Canaan (to invade part of Egypt) is the Peleset aka the Philistines!(Which is the root of where all later words with Palestine in it: be it the Roman and Byzantine Syria Palaestina, Palaestina Prima, or the Islamic Caliphate's region of Jund Filastin starting in the 7th century CE, etc get the name Palestine from aka again from the Philistines themselves)
Also the Wikipedia article (again fully sourced with academic references) called "Timeline of the name Palestine" then goes on to note the 8th century BCE Assyrian references of Palestine such as Adad-nirari III in circa 800 BCE and Dur-Sharrukin/The Annals of Sargon II of Assyria in circa 717 BCE referring to the land as Palashtu or Pilistu meaning as historians note Philistines/Palestine! And then even more clearly we have the Ancient Greek historians and writers Herodotus of the 5th century BCE and Aristotle of the 4th century BCE who clearly refer to the land in question as Palestine!!! In circa 450 BCE Herodotus in his work "The Histories" writes of the land as a "district of Syria, called Palestine" i.e. Herodotus is referring to the concept of a Greater Syria (in Arabic Syria al-Kubra, or also termed in Arabic Bilad ash-Sham referring to the whole Levant region as one entity of Sham/Syria with different DISTRICTS i.e. the Syrians of Palestine like one could say "the Americans of California", or "the Americans of Texas", etc etc). And then in circa 340 BCE Aristotle in his work "Meteorology" writes: "Again if, as is fabled, there is a lake in PALESTINE, such that if you bind a man or beast and throw it in it floats and does not sink, this would bear out what we have said. They say that this lake is so bitter and salt that no fish live in it and that if you soak clothes in it and shake them it cleans them." Most historians say Aristotle is here referring clearly to البحر الميت al-Bahr al-Mayyit meaning in English the Dead Sea in Palestine.
Will the presence of the holy spirit finally unlock the key for witness between world brethren?
To achieve this goal, the Zionists launched a number of wars and committed dozens of Massacres, starting with the massacre in Baldat al-Shaikh in December 1947.
Ever since, Zionist ethnic cleansing and land theft never stopped. Eviction of Palestinian Arabs from their homes in East Jerusalem and the order to expel thousands of Palestinian Arabs from the West Bank provide the latest examples in this regard.
Inspite of all Zionist crimes and efforts, millions of Palestinian Arabs are still living within the boundaries of Mandate Palestine. According to the latest figures of the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics, the number of Jews residing in Palestine is 5,726,000. The total number of Palestinian Arabs living within the boundaries of Mandate Palestine is over 5.5 million. Accordingly, sixty-two years of Zionist efforts to cleanse Palestine of its Arabs came to naught.
The latest massacre committed against the Flotilla while the whole world is watching will put an end to the Zionist criminal acts.
What happened to the Flotilla would put an end to the Zionist criminality and opens the road to a road leading to a state within which both Arabs and Jews could live side by side as equal people with equal rights.
“The Arab delegations had tried actively to convince other delegations to vote against partition by appealing to logic, justice and law. Their efforts were successful with delegations who had a living conscience end an independent judgment. But some delegations were compelled to change their stand when they saw power end the material interests of their countries on the other side. We remember how the delegate of Haiti shed tears when he was forced to change his country's vote to one in favour of partition. We recall how General Romulo of the Philippines left the U.S.A, because of Zionist threats. Dr Arce of the Argentine, who had stood against partition, came to me and said that he was sorry that he had to abstain rather than to vote against partition, but this was the result of pressure on his government. These are a few of the several delegates who were forced to vote against their convictions. Sometime before the vote was taken I was talking with Lester Pearson, then Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada and later Prime Minister. I said, "Mr Pearson, do you believe that the act of partitioning Palestine against the will of its inhabitants is an act dictated by conscience and law?" He answered me frankly, "Dr Jamali, politics doesn't know conscience or law unless they are supported by power. As for us today, we are obliged to comply with the policy of the U.S.A. in what she decides on Palestine." Thus Lester Pearson remained a strong supporter of Zionism, not because of conscientious conviction or for legal reasons, but because power and political interests required it of him. The same held true for the representative of Czechoslovakia who also said that the legal aspect of the Palestine problem had been ignored and that the politics of the Great Powers decided the issue and that the U.S.A. had the last word in the matter of Palestine.”
(Experiences in Arab Affairs 1943-1958 by Mohommed Fadhel Jamali, Former Prime Minister of Iraq Web published http://physics.harvard.edu/~wilson/Fadhel.html)
Quote- Map 1 shows the approximate location of the Palestinian land transferred to JNF through a fictitious sale agreement conducted in 1949 and 1950 with the Israeli government which seized the refugee property.
Source: Granott Agrarian Reform, pp. 107-111
Table 1: List of Refugee Land 'Sold' to JNF in January 1949 ("The First Million")
end quote.
This is the bogus "land sales" the Zionist concluded by either stealing land and then allegedly "buying it" or by working with people who didn't even own the land in the hey days of European Colonialism!
-Walter Guinness, 1st Baron Moyne(assassinated 6 Nov/1944 by Zionist terrorists)
"But this statement has not removed doubts, and His Majesty's Government therefore now declare unequivocally that it is not part of their policy that Palestine should become a Jewish State. They would indeed regard it as contrary to their obligations to the Arabs under the Mandate, as well as to the assurances which have been given to the Arab people in the past, that the Arab population of Palestine should be made the subjects of a Jewish State against their will. "
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/brwh1939.asp
For the Zionists, accepting is a matter of money and gain, because the Land does not belong to them any way and they did not care about the other people's fate.
they could co exist... some ppl are just too stubborn and selfish..
Well that is exactly a silly question, frankly speaking i cannot see any benefit from the establishmkent of Israel what i want is simply to say the truth that no matter what Israel gives an autonomy or even an independent Palestinian state Israel still has STOLEN most of the Palestinian territory from the very first place its an occupation, asking Palestinian to live together with the Israelis is like asking the Indians to share its own territory with the British or like asking the americans to let British take over New York.
And amazingly from since 1971 Palestinians has been willing to do that indicated by the Arafat Peace proposal which is not only denied by the israeli govt but also erased from the worlds history, even till know most agreements signed by both partiers are to much of the extent not FAIR or EQUAL the coastal and the green lush land always goes to the ISraeli why the desert and the remainings well you know where it goes.Andf as if it was not bad enough The Israeli has been so vigorous in violating these agreements like the checkpoints and the Israeli "Apartheid" wall.
SO why cant they live together,it depends to whom you ask the question
would just like to know if its okay to use some of the content, I will have a link pointing to where the content came from
Why should the Jews share OUR LANDS with us?? There is NO COUNTRY in the whole world established based on religion, except for the bloody israel. Let the jews go to where they came from: Poland, Russia, wherever. Palestine WAS for our ancestors and STILL IS. They kicked us out and took it over, and sooner or later, we will kick them off too and get back what belongs to us.
Long Live Palestine. israel (with a small initial) no more -- inshallah.