Only a Palestinian State ensures Israel's survival

No the Jews were NOT a majority since the 1880s.. You might want to check the Turkish census..

Muslims were the largest group by far, followed by the Christian population.. with a minority of Jews.. They hardly bothered to count the Negev Bedouin..

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Jerusalem#Jews_as_absolute_or_relative_majority

1896, Jews were the majority

 

You are looking at the wiki demographic on JERUSALEM not Palestine, but even in Jerusalem the Arab quarter was the largest.

 

yeah, i was talking about Jerusalem.

read the thread.

 

how's that contridacting what I provided?

 

your numbers come from them.

they have every reason to lie

 

according to The Village Statistics of 1945, a joint survey work prepared by the Government Office of Statistics and the Department of Lands of the British Mandate Government for the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry on Palestine, the following districts which now make up the lands of the West Bank had these percentages being Arab-owned land:

Jenin-84%

Nablus-87%

Ramallah-99%

Jerusalem-84%

Hebron-96%



this shows, clearly, that before the 1948 war, the VAST majority of land in the West Bank was Arab-owned and not state land

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandate_Palestine#Land_ownership_by_district

 

You disagree and use the word 'disgusting'. This lets me know you have strong feeling connected to this. The problem is that you have a different narrative to this woman. That is very genuine and I appreciate that but nonetheless it is a different narrative.

1882 I understand was the first aliyah. These I understand were mainly Eastern European and Russian Jews. They needed somewhere safe to stay and call home. What she calls the beginning of the occupation was the end of WW1 when the Balfour Declaration came into being. That to me is completely understandable that she will see it that way because that is what led to the hell she must live today. That is what led to the hell her ancestors have experienced since 48 and indeed before. I know they fought back when they realised their homeland was going to be taken over by Jews but horrible though it was that is the sort of thing which does happen when you try to take over someone's homeland. I know early on the British spoke to the Zionists and asked them to be inclusive, to include the Muslims and Christians in their projects but the Zionists wanted theirs only for Jews.

She doesn't say whether her family was one of those whose ancestral home is in what is now Israel or whether they come from Gaza but there is no way that the grief these people have suffered and the length of time they have suffered it is not itself a sin on humanity. 1918 as far as she is concerned with the Balfour Declaration is what set in pace the end of her right to live as a free person on her homeland.

For yourself, your narrative is different. How you have been taught things is different. Your ancestors needs were different but for her that date, 1918 was when her rights as a human being ended. You yourself have spoken about how the Balfour Declaration stated that the rights of those already living in Palestine were not to be infringed by giving Jewish people a homeland. They were destroyed.

Despite your narrative, colonisation of another people's land, which this was despite them being open to European Jews arriving as they had before, is imo possibly one of the most barbaric things we European's have done. That is particularly colonisation with the intent of replacing the indigenous population which was and still is the intention in Israel so while I do understand that you have your own narrative on this, for her to say the occupation began in 1918 is correct according to her narrative. Possibly understanding these differences is one of the most important aspects of healing them.

 

The numbers they used came from country reports that respect the Turkish, Jordanian and Israeli laws about Judea and Samaria.
If you are calling them a liars (Turkey and Jordan) , it means that you are ignoring importent laws that the Arab building and the Jewish based on them.

 

the only numbers that matter are those from the UN census done in 1945.

it shows that the vast majority of land in the West Bank was owned by Arabs

 

Americans not approving of Israeli's occupation of palestinian land should lead by example. if they want to see that change they should be that change and return the land to native americans.

 

I'm refering you to the rBritish reports from 1930, you could see there how much land Jews held at the time.

 

Its already been said that "the only figures that matter are those from UN in 1945.

Here's more :

"The history of the acquisition of agricultural land in Palestine and of the land cultivation system before partition will give the reader same idea of the disparity between Jews and Arabs with respect to land ownership in Palestine. The State of Israel has perpetuated this disparity, mainly through the confiscation of land belonging to the Palestinian Arabs and its policy of Jewish settlements, which is also discussed in this study. The acquisition of land in Palestine cannot be discussed without giving the background to the ownership of agricultural land in the country.



ACQUISITION OF LAND IN PALESTINE


From the time of the Romans to the nineteenth century, the land tenure and land cultivation systems in Palestine had two main features: first, there were no laws or regulations on the management and cultivation of land in Palestine that were not completely out of date and, secondly, the big landowners owned nearly all the land. Most of the big landowners belonged to the privileged upper class (the "nobles") who generally lived away from their land; that is to say, they were absentee landlords whose agricultural land was cultivated by the fellahin for a pittance.

This system of tenant farming, known as fief under the Turkish occupation, became less frequent towards 1858, when the authorities of the Ottoman Empire decided to establish a land registry, the Defterkhané, 1/ the main effect of which was to improve the management of land in Palestine so as to make it more profitable.

One of the characteristics of this period is the relatively high land taxes the fellahin had to pay the Ottoman government and the big landowners. Side by side with this system of land cultivation, there were others under which the land was managed by the community (Mash'a) and the Moslem religious institutions (waqf).

A third type of land ownership - and one that assumed considerable importance under the British Mandate, was that of the common lands, which were considered to be public property and were administered by the Mandatory Power.

Consideration of the systems of cultivation and land ownership in Palestine shows that most of the land was under the control either of the Ottoman government (Ottoman fiefs) or Turkish nationals, or of a minority of the Palestine Arab population, most of whom lived outside Palestine and had interests that did not conflict with those of the occupying power. The members of this minority group are even said to have made profit sales of land prior to and immediately after the First World War.

It can therefore be said that very little land was acquired by the Jewish minority, whose holdings had been practically negligible up to then, and they did not make any sizeable acquisition of land until the Jews of Eastern Europe, lured by the promise of a Jewish homeland in the Balfour Declaration, started to immigrate into Palestine under the pressure of the social and economic conditions obtaining in the countries in which they were living.

Two periods may be distinguished in the Jews' acquisition of land in Palestine. During the first of these, extending from 1880 to 1920, the Jews were small landowners, and the amount of land they owned was not very large compared with that of the Palestine Arab majority. 2/ The main feature of the second period, which began soon after the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and extends from 1921 to 1947, is the establishment of Jewish settlements, the Kibbutzim, with the encouragement of such Jewish institutions as the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association,* the Palestine Land Development Company and the Jewish National Fund.

The purpose of these three institutions was to transfer the Jewish populations of Europe to Palestine and provide them with facilities, homes, jobs and especially land in the new host country.

It has been estimated that by about June 1947, the Jewish minority in Palestine had taken over 1,850,000 dunams** out of a total of 13 million dunams, mainly as a result of transactions between the above-mentioned Jewish institutions and the big Arab landowners of Palestine.3/ The remainder of the land in Jewish hands came either from the Mandatory Power (cessions) or from religious charitable organizations. The land ceded by the Mandatory Power was considered to be publicly owned; in some cases it could be made available to a specific community.

In its Village Statistics, 4/ the Mandatory Power estimates the total area of land owned by Jews in 1945 to be 1,491,699 dunams, compared with about 13 million dunams owned by Arabs in Palestine.

This disparity with respect to the ownership of land persisted until the country was partitioned in 1947, and it provided arguments for the Members of the United Nations Organization that were opposed to the partition plan.5/ One of the features of the partition plan for Palestine was that the Arab populations in both states envisaged in the plan should own and enjoy most of the land (see Annex I); the role played by land in the formation of the State is no secret.

This disparity between the Arab and Jewish populations with respect to land ownership disappeared after the military operations of 1948, when land and whole villages belonging to Palestinian Arabs fell into the hands of the State of Israel and its inhabitants.


______________
*The Palestine Jewish Colonization Association (PICA), an association of Jewish interests, established mainly on the inititiative of Baron Edmond de Rothschild, which was active in Palestine long before the Zionist organ(*)ization became operational.

** A dunam: a unit of area equal to 1,0(X) square metres.

- See more at: http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/7D094FF80FF004F085256DC200680A27#sthash.YLfAqIBa.dpuf


tata -

 

in 1945, the Arabs owned the vast majority of the land in the districts of Palestine that encompassed the West Bank.

 

Let see what the "Palestinian" nagotiation team published in September 2008 and Al Jazeera refered:

Property right:

The British Mandate leased Miri land to Jews on a long term basis:

The main (not all, yeah?) Jewish land in the West Bank and Gaza by 1948:

About Har Homa:

The condition of Gaza and the dislocated Jews from there:

Source: http://www.ajtransparency.com/en/pr...rs/201218203525218283.html#footnote_anchor-71

As you see both of you, even the PLO said that the Jews that acquired land in the West Bank and Gaza before 1948 and after 1967 have the right of return to them!! and yet both of you, that you are soppurt them, ignoring what they said.

Marlowe, this is how you treat your fallow brothers? by ignoring them?

 

LAND OWNERSHIP IN ERETZ ISRAEL/PALESTINE
~by HBendor

The question of land ownership in Israel - or before 1948, Palestine Mandate - has been the subject of much discussion. What is the status of the land on which, from the end of the nineteenth century, Jewish settlements - kibbutzim, moshavim, villages, and cities - were established? For decades, Arab propaganda has been reiterating the claim that, legally and ethically, the Arabs are the true owners of the land and that the portion actually belonging to the Jews is minute.

The Arab claim rests on two premises:
(1) At the latter part of the nineteenth century, the Palestinian Arabs were living and cultivating their lands in peace and security, until the European Jewish immigrants drove them from their territory, creating a large class of landless and dispossessed Arabs;

(2) In 1948 a small Jewish minority, which owned only 5% of the territory of the country, took over the 95% that belonged to the Arabs, and, illegally and immorally, established the State on that territory. It is necessary at this point to examine the state of the land and its inhabitants during the period of Turkish rule. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries - long before the beginning of modern Jewish settlement and Jewish acquisition of land - the population of the country was minuscule and continually decreasing. In 1738, the land was described by the English archeologist Thomas Shaw as "lacking in people to till its fertile soil" (Travels and Observations Relating to Several Parts of Barbary and the Levant).

The French historian Conte Constantine Francois Volney writes:
"The peasants are incessantly making inroads on each other's lands, destroying their corn, durra, sesame and olive-trees, and carrying off their sheep, goats and camels. The Turks, who are everywhere negligent in repressing similar disorders, are attentive to them here, since their authority is very precarious. The Bedouin, whose camps occupy the level country, are continually at open hostilities with them, of which the peasants avail themselves to resist their authority or do mischief to each other, according to the blind caprice of their ignorance or the interest of the moment. Hence arises an anarchy which is still more dreadful than the despotism that prevails elsewhere, while the mutual the contending parties renders the appearance of devastation of this part of Syria more wretched than that of any other." (Travels Through Syria and Egypt in the Years 1783, 1784, and 1785)

There were, in addition to the local disputes, actual wars. In the beginning of the nineteenth century Napoleon's armies invaded the land; in 1831 it was conquered by the Egyptians, and nine years later again by the Turks. All these - in addition to the internal fighting - created in the country a climate of insecurity, which led to a sharp decline in its physical state and to the emigration of its inhabitants, who left in search of better living conditions elsewhere. Many of those who nevertheless stayed and continued to work their land were forced to relinquish ownership of it and find refuge with people of means or with the Muslim religious endowment fund ("the wakf" . A situation was created, then, in which the true owners of the lands did not reside on them, but leased them to others while they themselves spent their lives in such distant places as Damascus, Beirut, and Cairo.

H. B. Tristram, who wrote of his travels in the Holy Land in his 1865 book The Land of Israel.- A Journal of Travels in Palestine, presents a revealing description of the living conditions in the Land of Israel as he found them in the middle of the nineteenth century:

"A few years ago, the whole Ghor (Jordan Valley) was in the hands of the fellahin = (Imported Land tillers) and much of it cultivated for corn. Now the whole of it is in the hands of the Bedouin = (Marauding Nomads), who eschew all agriculture except in a few spots cultivated here and there by their slaves; and with the Bedouin come lawlessness and the uprooting of all Turkish authority. No government is now acknowledged on the east side; and unless the Porte = (Turkish Leader) acts with greater firmness and caution than is his wont... Palestine will be desolated and given up to the nomads."

Alexander Keith, recalling Volney's 1785 description (quoted above) fifty years later, commented: "In his day [Volney's] the land had not fully reached its last degree of desolation and depopulation." (The Land of Israel).

Other travelers and pilgrims recorded similar reports of the dreary state of the Land around the middle of the nineteenth century. Here are just a few examples:

Alphonse de Lamartine, in 1835: "...a complete eternal silence reigns in the town, on the highways, in the country ... the tomb of a whole people" (Recollections of the East, Vol. I, p. 30.

A contemporary German encyclopedia (Brockhaus, "Allegmeine deutsche Real-Encyklopaidie", Vol. VIII, p. 206, Leipzig, 1827) calls Palestine "desolate and roamed through by Arab robber-bands."

In 1849, the American W. F. Lynch described the desertion of Palestinian villages "caused by the frequent forays of the wandering Bedouin" (Narrative of the United States Expedition to the River Jordan and the Dead Sea, p. 489).

And again H. B. Tristram, in 1865: "... both in the north and south (of the Sharon plain), land is going out of cultivation, and whole villages are rapidly disappearing from the face of the earth. Since the year 1838, no less than 20 villages have been thus erased from the map (by the Bedouin) and the stationary population extirpated" (p. 490).

Better known in this context, perhaps, are the words of the American author Mark Twain, who records personal impressions of a visit to the Holy Land in 1867. His account abounds in descriptions such as these:

"Desolate country whose soil is rich enough but is given over wholly to weeds - a silent mournful expanse We reached Tabor safely ... We never saw a human being on the whole route" (p. 451, 480); "There is not a solitary village throughout its (the Jezreel Valley's) whole extent - not for thirty miles in either direction. There are two or three small clusters of Bedouin tents but not a single permanent habitation. One may ride ten miles, hereabouts, and not see ten human beings" (p. 44; "Of all the lands there are for dismal scenery, I think Palestine must be the prince. The hills are barren ... the valleys are unsightly deserts... It is a hopeless, dreary, heartbroken land... Palestine is desolate and unlovely... Palestine is no more of this workday world. It is sacred to poetry and tradition - it is dreamland" (pp. 564, 567).

Referring to the same era, the Christian historian James Parkes writes in "Whose Land"? "Peasant and Bedouin alike have contributed to the ruin of the countryside on which both depend for a livelihood... In spite of the immense fertility of the soil, it is probable that in the first half of the nineteenth century the population sank to the lowest level it had ever known in historic times."

Conclusion: The propagandist myth of an "entire Palestinian people uprooted from its soil by the Zionists" is shattered against the reality of the nineteenth century: plunder and devastation, war and destruction, chaos, anarchy, a population dispersed and declining. All this occurred many years before the beginning of the Zionist settlement, while the Jewish population still resided in the "Holy Cities" of Jerusalem, Hebron, Tiberias, and Safed, long before these Jews together with Jewish immigrants from the lands of the Diaspora began purchasing land and tilling the soil. Moreover, at the end of the nineteenth century the Jewish pioneers began to make the desert areas of the land bloom, rendering the country highly attractive to Jews and Arabs alike. It is an undisputed fact that after World War I the pattern of Arab emigration was reversed: Until that time, the number of Arabs who left the land exceeded that of those who came to live in it. Starting in the 1920s, there were more immigrants than emigrants. In addition, where did they settle? Usually in those areas which did the Jewish settlers develop!

What was the state of the land - its ownership and cultivation - at the end of the period of Turkish rule? Most of the territory was concentrated in the hands of a few wealthy landlords, most of whom lived far from their property. In many cases these lands were, or seemed, unfit for agriculture, and were therefore neither settled nor cultivated. Tenant farmers worked occasional plots. According to a Turkish register drawn up shortly before World War 1, there were at that time 3,130,000 Dunams in the hands of 144 landlords that is, approximately 22,000 Dunams average per family. In the Nablus and Tul-Karem districts, five families held 157,000 Dunams, of which the Husseini family owned 50,000 Dunams in various parts of the country, and the Abdel-Hadi family 60,000. The largest single holding, 230,000 Dunams in the Jezreel valley, was in the hands of the Sursuk family, which resided in Beirut and Cairo.

The Palestinian peasant, then, was indeed exploited and at times dispossessed, not by the Jewish settler, but rather by his fellow-Arabs: the local sheiks, the Bedouin village elders, the Turkish tax collector, the merchants and moneylenders (at interest rates as high as 60%), and if he was a tenant-farmer = imported Land Tiller, as was usually the case, by the absentee landlord as well.

When considering the issue of the lands which passed from Arabs to Jews, and on which the pioneering Zionist settlement was founded, six facts should be borne in mind:
(1) The land was paid for in full.
(2) Most of the land purchased involved large tracts belonging to absentee landlords.
(3) Most of the land acquired was uncultivated because it was swampy, sandy, or rocky, or for other reasons considered unsuitable for agriculture.
(4) For this reason, the initial purchases did not involve large sums of money, but with the passage of years the price of land began to rise as Arab landowners took advantage of the growing demand for rural tracts.
(5) Modern agricultural methods introduced by the Jewish pioneers, which improved the lands and increased their yield, were quickly adopted by the neighboring Arab farmers.
(6) The number of farmers forced to leave their land due to the Zionist undertaking was relatively very small.

All those who left were compensated in accordance with the law, either by monetary payment or by other agricultural land; and indeed most continued to be farmers.

Furthermore, a large number of Arabs from other parts of the country or from neighboring countries settled in the areas developed by the Jews.

Following are some revealing statistics:
(1) Out of the 429,887 Dunams acquired by PICA (Palestine Jewish Colonization Association) from private landowners between 1880 and 1947, 293,545 Dunams - close to 70% - were large tracts of uncultivated land, most of which belonged to absentee landlords.
(2) The purchases of the Palestine Land Development Corporation included an even greater percentage of large tracts - approximately 90% (455,169 Dunams out of 512,979, which were purchased of private owners).
If we add to this the 66,513 Dunams of Beersheba desert land and the swamps of the Hula Valley, we will find that the purchases of the corporation totaled close to 580,000 Dunams.
(3) A third body which purchased property in Palestine was the Jewish National Fund, which leased the lands to groups or individual settlers for periods of forty-nine or ninety-nine years, in accordance with the principle that the Land of Israel belongs to the Jewish People, and no one has the right to hold permanent ownership of Israeli soil. In the first thirty years of its existence, the JNF acquired 270,084 Dunams, of which 239,170 (close to 90%) were large tracts. This percentage dropped during subsequent years, but of the total area of 566,312 Dunams purchased by individuals, at least 50% were large tracts of land which was either totally uncultivated or only superficially cultivated.

The prices paid by Jewish individuals and organizations for property in Palestine reached, during the 1930s, legendary proportions. The Palestine Royal Commission ("the Peel Commission" of 1937 reported that in the year 1933 alone sums totaling 854,769 Pounds sterling were paid; in 1934 the total reached 1,647,836 Pounds sterling and in 1935, 1,699,488 Pounds sterling. During those three years alone, then, the total sum paid to Arab landlords reached 4,202,180 Pounds sterling, which was the equivalent of over $20 million at the time. Ten years later, in 1944, an acre (4 Dunams) of good, fertile land in the State of Iowa cost $ 100, while in that same year Jews in Palestine were paying over $ 1,000 for an acre of parched soil.

The claim that the Arabs were being driven out was raised as early as the 1930s. This claim was investigated by the British, and rejected almost completely - and this at a time when British policy in Palestine was clearly moving from a pro-Zionist to a pro-Arab position. Two official British documents from the year 1937 deal with this claim. One is the report of the Peel Commission (Chapter 9, Par. 61), which relates that during the years 1920-1939, 688 Arab tenant farmers were removed from their land as a result of purchases made by the Jews. Five hundred twenty-six of the Arab farmers remained in some agricultural occupation, and four hundred received alternative plots of land in other locations. The second document is one of a series of memoranda prepared by the mandatory government and published in London (Colonial No. 133, p. 37). It contains the findings of the 1931 investigation of Lewis French, which totally refute the claim that the Zionist undertaking in Palestine caused the creation of "an entire landless people among the Palestinian Arabs". The memorandum notes that the total number of applications of registration as landless Arabs reached 3,271. Of these, the claims of 2,607 were rejected as not belonging to this category, and only 664 heads of families were recognized as having legitimate claims.

Approximately half this number - 347 - agreed to accept the government's offer of resettlement. The rest refused, either because they had found employment elsewhere, or because they were unaccustomed to the agricultural methods, such as irrigation, employed in the new locations, or because of other reasons. In his investigation of the hill country, where the Jewish purchases were minimal, Lewis French found that out of seventy-one Arab claims of eviction, sixty-eight were rejected (The Esco Foundation for Palestine, Inc., Vol. II, p. 716).

Finally… What was the land ownership situation when the State of Israel was established in 1948? According to the official data published by the outgoing British mandatory administration before the establishment of the State (Survey of Palestine, 1946), only 8.6% of the land was in fact owned by Jews, while over 70% was state land, which had passed from Turkish to British authority and now to Israel, the legal heir of the British Mandate. The remaining lands - 33% belonged to Arab landowners, and the Arab owners who hastened to obey the call of their leaders “to clear the way for the Arab armies, which would annihilate the Jewish State”, abandoned 16.9%. These landowners did not consider the possibility that the Jewish State would remain.

The key to the entire problem lies in that large percentage of state land, most of which was in the Negev - an unsettled area of approximately 12,557,00 Dunams, or close to 50% of the entire area (26,320,000) of mandatory Palestine. These lands had never been under Arab ownership, neither during the period of British rule nor even during the preceding Turkish regime, these were simply STATE LANDS .

The contention heard time and again from Arab propagandists - that 95% of the territory of Palestine had belonged to the Arabs - is, therefore, entirely without basis in fact...!

To those that think differently without any substantiation I say… No amount of Monday morning quarter backing is going to help your belated dreaming…
There was no ARAB country in the middle east called Palestine... the place was called the Ottoman Empire for 400 years until 1917 when the British Forces Liberated it from the Turks and received a Mandate to manage it… They governed it for the next 30 years until 1948..

The Brits recognized the right of the Jews to the Land of their forefathers...
Palestine Arab nationalism to whatever degree it is conscious ideal today, is a product of recent political currents. Until the 1920’s, no such national community had even existed in Palestine. This is why the Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations Mandates charged the Jews of the National Home with guaranteeing the civil and religious right of other inhabitants... (The Arabs, Christians, Druze, Circassians, Kurds, Armenians, Bosnians, Moghrabim [North Africans], Egyptians, Syrian, Bedouins... were the other inhabitants.)

No mention was made of other National Rights of other inhabitants..., as it was recognized that the only NATIONAL CLAIM to the Area was that of the Jews...!! [/COLOR]

However, the FICTION of Palestine Arab Nationality is still being exploited. If the Palestinian Arabs were in fact a separate nationality, their anger should have been directed against Jordan and Egypt since these were the two countries that invaded duly “Reconstituted Israel in 1948”, and retained a substantial amount of Real Estate. (Jordan... Judea and Samaria and Egypt the Gaza area...) and never even considered creating a Palestinian Arab Entity there for nineteen years...

Now if you had an Atlas from let say from 1517 on to 1917 when the British took over... you would have noticed that the place was called “THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE” for FOUR HUNDRED years and NOTHING ELSE...!

There was NEVER a Palestine…! No independent Arab or Palestinian State ever existed in Palestine. When the distinguished Arab-American historian, Princeton University Prof. Philip Hitti, testified against partition before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, he said: "There is no such thing as 'Palestine' in history, absolutely not. In fact, Palestine is never explicitly mentioned in the Qur'an, rather it is called "the holy lands" (al-Arad al-Muqaddash)

At that time; Palestinian Arabs did not view themselves as having a separate identity. When the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations met in Jerusalem in February 1919 to choose Palestinian representatives for the Paris Peace Conference, the following resolution was adopted, quote:-

We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. National, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds connect us with it... Unquote.

In 1937, a local Arab leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, told the Peel Commission, which ultimately suggested the partition of Palestine: "There is no such country [as Palestine]! 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria."

The representative of the Arab Higher Committee to the UN submitted a statement to the General Assembly in May 1947 that said, "Palestine was part of the Province of Syria" and that, "politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the sense of forming a separate political entity." A few years later, Ahmed Shuqeiri, later the chairman of the PLO, told the Security Council: "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria."

Palestinian Arab nationalism is largely a post World War I phenomenon that did not become a significant political movement until after 1967 Six-Day War [since the PLO was created by Egypt in 1964]... and Israel's liberation of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) from the occupying forces of Jordan.

 

want to know who owned what land in Palestine in 1945?

the UN and the British already answered that question:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_mandate#Land_ownership_by_district



the green areas are owned by Arabs.

 

=====


OMG - It looks like you've been cherry picking out of that document.

Are you aware that the document that it refers to is a "Draft memorandum from NSU to Palestinian Negotiating Team that discusses options for dealing with property claims of Jews within the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) acquired before the beginning of the occupation, ????


"1. ISSUE



Property transactions benefiting Israel or its nationals that took place in the OPT during the occupation are invalid. This is because they violated the international humanitarian rules on property transactions, as well as the applicable local (Jordanian) laws, and were part of Israel?s illegal colonization enterprise. The future government of Palestine is therefore not required by international law to honour these transactions or the titles, rights or interests purportedly acquired through them (See NSU, “Property Transactions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory” Legal Brief, September 200.



However, these titles, rights and interests are to be distinguished from those acquired by Jews before the beginning of the occupation. The latter are, in principle, legitimate rights that exist under international law and that Israel is likely to claim from Palestinians in the negotiations. Palestinian negotiators will need a strategy for dealing with these pre-1967 Jews? rights.


Various options was considered : "A third option is for Palestinians to wait to see how negotiations on Palestinian refugees progress and, in the event that they do not progress well, to not recognize pre-1948 Jews? rights. Annex 3 provides legal arguments to support this position.7 However, the likelihood is that Israel will offer compensation, albeit nominal, to Palestinian refugees, in which case, Palestinian negotiators will be hard-pressed not to reciprocate.

In its consideration of this policy matter, the Palestinian leadership should be sensitive to the fact that a recognition by it of pre-1948 Jews? rights in the OPT may serve as a precedent for other Arab states, who may not respond well to it and who may allow it to affect their support for Palestinians.

--
It goes on with :
ANNEX 1



Who is a Lawful Jewish Property Owner?



Property transactions in favour of Israel or its nationals that took place in the OPT during the occupation are invalid. However, some Jews, albeit a very small minority, held property titles, rights and interests in accordance with international and local laws from before the beginning of the occupation. Determining who lawfully owned property before 1967 requires an analysis of the local laws applicable at the time.

===Before 1913, a landowner was a natural person who was an Ottoman national.
• Between 1913 and 1918, a landowner was a natural or legal person who was an Ottoman national.
• In 1920, a land purchaser was a natural or legal person who was resident in Palestine, irrespective of his nationality. However, he could only acquire property L3,000 or less in value or 300 dunums or less in area, and he had to immediately cultivate the land. In 1921, these restrictions were removed, including the residency requirement.
• It is unclear whether, after that, there were any restrictions on natural persons. In 1921, only a company of public utility could purchase land for land development or in quantities greater than those required for its works. In 1920, the JNF was registered as a company of public utility. In 1924, the PJCA was declared to be a company of public utility.
• Between 1940 and 1948, with few exceptions, land could only be transferred to Palestinian Arabs. It appears that these restrictions were removed in 1948.

==

I'm afraid its not quite as simple as you'd like to pass it off. I recommend that you do some more reading :
i.e.

"Reactions

Palestinian Authority

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said the leaked documents deliberately confuse Israeli and Palestinian positions, and that he had kept the Arab League updated on all details of the negotiations with Israel. - Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said the leaks were "a pack of lies", containing mistakes and inaccuracies and that his words were taken out of context and he had been misquoted.[ Erekat said that the "Palestinian Authority would never give up any of our rights. If we did indeed offer Israel the Jewish and Armenian Quarters of Jerusalem, and the biggest Yerushalayim as they claim, then why did Israel not sign a final status agreement? Is it not strange that we would offer all these concessions which Israel demands, yet there is still no peace deal?"[

Yasser Abed Rabbo, giving the PA's first official response, accused Al Jazeera and the Government of Qatar of attacking the Palestinian Authority, having a hostile attitude towards the PA since the days of former president Yasser Arafat Abed Rabbo was quoted saying that the Al-Jazeera leaks are "a distortion of the truth". Abed Rabbo accused the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, of giving Al Jazeera the "green light" to start the campaign, and called on the Emir to "extend the climate of transparency in his own state and reveal his true relations with Israel and Iran".


Ahmed Qurei, former Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority and chief Palestinian negotiator in the 2008 talks, said that "many parts of the documents were fabricated, as part of the incitement against the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian leadership."


Israel

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said that "even the most left-wing government of Olmert and Livni did not manage to reach a peace agreement, despite the many concessions." He also promoted his plan for peace, which would allocate 45% to 50% of the West Bank for the creation of a Palestinian state.[40]

Livni said that "the [peace] process did not fail and was not exhausted. It did not end, but was not allowed to ripen until an agreement was reached because of elections in Israel and this government's choice not to continue the negotiations

source :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_Papers#Palestinian_Authority

============


Palestine papers are distortion of truth, say Palestinian officials


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jan/24/palestine-papers-distortion-truth-reaction


--"But the offer was rejected out of hand by Israel because it did not include a big settlement near the city Ma'ale Adumim as well as Har Homa and several others deeper in the West Bank, including Ariel. "We do not like this suggestion because it does not meet our demands," Israel's then foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, told the Palestinians, "and probably it was not easy for you to think about it, but I really appreciate it



Read my siggy below

: ]:The news and truth are not the same thing."- - (Walter Lippman

 

Stuntman here's more :from Haaretz :

"The leaked documents completely discredit the claim that there is "no peace partner" made by the leader of the newly formed Atzmaut faction, Ehud Barak, and his boss, Benjamin Netanyahu.

The documents are testimony that the Palestinians are willing to go the distance for peace: They will relinquish their claims on the Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem and the surrounding areas, the Etzion settlement bloc and the settlements along the Green Line. This would all be in return for territories on the western side of this line, including the region of Gilboa and Mount Hebron.

According to a map that was shown to me two weeks ago, the major territorial disputes remain over Ariel, Elkana, Ma’aleh Adumim and the Har Homa suburb of East Jerusalem (which was built after the 1993 Oslo Accords).


" read more : http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/the-palestine-papers-al-jazeera-trumps-wikileaks-1.338875

The documents, apparently leaked from the Palestinian side, appear to show that while the Palestinians have made huge concessions during the last decade of peace talks, nothing they have offered has been good enough for the Israelis




Read more: http://www.theweek.co.uk/politics/8353/palestine-papers-why-leak-so-serious#ixzz3HLwNjNNJ


As you can see it all came to NOTHING .


.....

 

Things changed in the past 70 years Ronstar...., you cant go back to that map anymore you can raise all that died since then,

The Arab - Muslim - Palestinian narrative is "we were wronged, give us all we lost" and disregards what Israel paid for its "win", understandable because it holds the land but not if its supposed to give that land to the Palestinians, now Israel is willing to withdraw but demands some of it as compensation - mainly its clusture areas and Jerusalem - which the Arabs refuse, hence we are stuck.

 

yeah, since 1945 Israel has stolen a lot of Arab land to build Jewish settlements.

 

The other option was Arabs to "steal" Jewish land so we did very well in that regard, now we can offer assistance instead of begging for our lives.

 

Israel didn't have to steal Arab land in the West Bank after 1967.

they chose to.

 

It can be no "Palestinian State", because there are no "Palestinian people", but only Arab one.
And the Arabs, living in all parts of Israel should be its loyal citizens - and enjoy the very same rights as the Jews.
Like any other non-Jewish community in Israel.

 

by that logic, there is no such thing as an "Israeli".