Quote:
Originally Posted by i.beletesri
Actually very little Had to be 'Bought' since 2/3 of what became Israel was State Land and owned by NO Arab.. passing from the Ottomans to the British to The Jews.
There was never a self-governing state on 'palestine' since it's was called ISRAEL... the first time. (renamed 'palestina' by the Romans, not Arabs, lol)
So much for 'sovereignty'.
|
Beletesri - the above is your exact quote. So as to avoid vacant cross-purposes dialogue - what exactly was YOUR point?
1) To me it seems that you are saying that the 'annexation' of real estate for the creation of '1948 Israel' was fine because the bulk of the ground did not belong to Arabs. If I am mistaken, please enlighten me as to what you really meant. If I am correct, then my rebuttal stands.
2) What has the existence or not of the name Israel or Palestine to do with the price of eggs? If the people who lived there for the past 10 000 years decide one day to call ther new country Canaan or Palestine or something else, what difference would it make to ancestral rights? Does it matter that Namibia is no longer called German South West Africa or that that name never existed in past centuries? I really dont understand your point.
3) In your most recent contribution you imply, without any support whatsoever, that the Zionist Myth threads are simply claims with no substance. Let us take Myth 1
Zionist Myth 1: Real Estate equals Sovereignty mean. Let's test your recent opinion.
Do Zionists claim that they never took any land from anyone? Do they claim that because ground was not owned by specific individuals, that it was fine to give it to someone else what had had no real control over it for more than 2700 years? If they do, then it is not just an empty claim - correct? It then remains to be seen whether it is a Myth or the real truth.