Ask Joan Peters. Peters is not a historian and her book has been exposed as fraudulent and mendacious by those having far superior knowledge of the politics of the region than Miss Peters could dream of. Naturally you think she's wonderful because she supports your narrative.
British reports and studies looked into this issue 65 years ago. Most Arabs in Palestine in 1948 were descended from folks who came to Palestine before the British Mandate existed.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh superior knowledge is good but not yours of course since you cannot find where I lied but rushes to defame me like a Pollack.
It looks like , its only the dumbest /most gullible of Jews who are still trying to claim her book as a reliable source. AFAI can tell , apart from a minority of bone headed Israeli extremists , majority Israelis who've read it , consider her book an irrelevance. .....
Do you have to get nasty? To tell the truth, Mr. Bendor, I set you a trap and you walked right into it!!! It tells me that you, a Jew also, will lie to support another Jew's lies!! This is only a small example, but it seems to be the pattern throughout. Finkelstein, a turn-coat, is the exception, so is Benjamin Freedman: http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/freedman.htm But Netanyahu is not according to Sarcozy and Obama.
Most so-called "Arabs " are a mix of Arabized - natives /indigenous (Falastini) (Christians + even Jewish converts ) the people who inhabited that land since the time of Jerusalem's liberation from Byzantines by Umar Al Khattab in 637 AD Extract : "Capture of Jerusalem By 637, Muslim armies began to appear in the vicinity of Jerusalem. In charge of Jerusalem was Patriarch Sophronius, a representative of the Byzantine government, as well as a leader in the Christian Church. Although numerous Muslim armies under the command of Khalid ibn al-Walid and Amr ibn al-’As began to surround the city, Sophronius refused to surrender the city unless Umar came to accept the surrender himself. Having heard of such a condition, Umar ibn al-Khattab left Madinah, travelling alone with one donkey and one servant. When he arrived in Jerusalem, he was greeted by Sophronius, who undoubtedly must have been amazed that the caliph of the Muslims, one of the most powerful people in the world at that point, was dressed in no more than simple robes and was indistinguishable from his servant. The Mosque of Umar still stands across the street from the Church of the Holy Sepulchre today Umar was given a tour of the city, including the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. When the time for prayer came, Sophronius invited Umar to pray inside the Church, but Umar refused. He insisted that if he prayed there, later Muslims would use it as an excuse to convert it into a mosque – thereby depriving Christendom of one of its holiest sites. Instead, Umar prayed outside the Church, where a mosque (called Masjid Umar – the Mosque of Umar) was later built. The Treaty of Umar As they did with all other cities they conquered, the Muslims had to write up a treaty detailing the rights and privileges regarding the conquered people and the Muslims in Jerusalem. This treaty was signed by Umar and Patriarch Sophronius, along with some of the generals of the Muslim armies. The text of the treaty read: . This is the assurance of safety which the servant of God, Umar, the Commander of the Faithful, has given to the people of Jerusalem. He has given them an assurance of safety for themselves for their property, their churches, their crosses, the sick and healthy of the city and for all the rituals which belong to their religion. Their churches will not be inhabited by Muslims and will not be destroyed. Neither they, nor the land on which they stand, nor their cross, nor their property will be damaged. They will not be forcibly converted. The people of Jerusalem must pay the taxes like the people of other cities and must expel the Byzantines and the robbers. Those of the people of Jerusalem who want to leave with the Byzantines, take their property and abandon their churches and crosses will be safe until they reach their place of refuge. The villagers may remain in the city if they wish but must pay taxes like the citizens. Those who wish may go with the Byzantines and those who wish may return to their families. Nothing is to be taken from them before their harvest is reaped. - Quoted in The Great Arab Conquests, from Tarikh Tabari At the time, this was by far one of the most progressive treaties in history. For comparison, just 23 years earlier when Jerusalem was conquered by the Persians from the Byzantines, a general massacre was ordered. Another massacre ensued when Jerusalem was conquered by the Crusaders from the Muslims in 1099. --- One of Umar’s guides in Jerusalem was a Jew named Kaab al-Ahbar. Umar further allowed Jews to worship on the Temple Mount and the Wailing Wall, while the Byzantines banned them from such activities. . Source Karen Armstrong "Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths " ...
Sarcozy ??????????? Come on I saw his old mistress now wife naked in a magazine... Well I did not like the display. As for Obama I will refrain from making any comments. I am still pondering someone like you setting a trap for HB... wonder why?
OK, OK, so you want to have some fun... this explains it... why don't you have a drink then, as long as we are on the subject.
Okay, these things are confusing. Who is correct? Is Palestine ever going to have peace and is Israel ever going to be allowed peace? I do not understand how grown up people cannot simply come to some agreement. The difference of power transfer...How much easier it would be if these countries had oil or gold or copper under their soil.... They would then be invaded and all else would not matter any more. I do know this much, the interference of foreign governments has always @?&£-*$ the local evolution of political identity.
2 sides to the coin - 1) The Veto vote interference of Moscow in Syria is the major cause of so many dead Syrian. 2) US possible interference will save many lives..
Where did they get that? Do you think they know that the Israelites arose out of the hill-country Canaanites? Do they know that there is a long and continuous line from those early people through to the Palestinians of today? I suspect not. They should read - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Palestine Do you think they know that in the mid-1800s there were only 10 000 Jews living in all of Palestine while at the same time there were hundreds of thousands of Arab Palestinians resident? But your Honour, I only stole 1.7% of the total wealth of my neighbour. Why do you accuse me of being a criminal? Then why did Israel reject the negotiating offers from the Arabs in 1971, 1973, 2002 and 2007, and not negotiate so as to stop them from being illegal as they are today? Didn’t they know that Oslo was killed by Bibi. He boasted that on video. The ABC plan was killed by him. Have they read “181”? Seems not. Ahh ... OK, so the number of settlements violating the Geneva Conventions have been constant since 1993, but the number of civilian settlers violating those Conventions has grown greatly? I am sure that makes the Palestinians feel warm and cuddly. That might be facilitated in Gaza if the embargo based on democratic election results were to be lifted. Do you think they know that? So what? See “181”. Do the producers know that resolution exists? No. The Zionist militia expelled the other 75% of them. Why are the producers proud of this fact?
Neither compulsory nor voluntary transfer of civilian populations are legal according to Geneva IV. Netanyahu's announcement of an accelleration of the settlement building programme is a clear indication of government complicity in, and the encouragement of, further illegality. Paragraphs 1 and 6 of Article 49 read pretty unambiguously to me. Paragraph 1 mentions forcible transfer of the occupied persons; paragraph 6 clearly states that the transfer of citizens of the occupying power onto occupied territory is prohibited. No mention is made in 6 of coercion, compulsion or force.
I did go to the above link to read, haba, haba what did I find??? hmmmmmmmm Ancient Palestine[edit source] See also: History of Palestine and History of ancient Israel and Judah#Demographic history During the Proto-Canaanite period agricultural communities were established. By the early Bronze Age (3000–2200 BCE), independent Canaanite city-states existed on the plains and in coastal regions. During the Iron Age the Philistines, a part of the Sea People probably of Aegean origin, occupied the southern coast of Canaan, and mingled with the local population, absorbing the Canaanite language and losing their separate identity by the 500 BCE. At the same time the Israelites emerged from a dramatic social transformation that took place amongst the Canaanite people of the central hill country of Canaan around 1200 BCE, with no signs of violent invasion or even of peaceful infiltration of a clearly defined ethnic group from elsewhere. The Israelites are therefore descendants of the original early Iron Age occupants of the uplands of Canaan.[1] Following the withdrawal of the Egyptian Empire around 1150 BC, the Israelites were able to extend their territory by gradually re-integrating with their Canaanite neighbours. This expansion was initially held in check by battles with the Philistines. Eventually, however, towards the end of the tenth century BCE, the Israelites established a kingdom with its capital at Samaria. Some time later, in the eighth century BC, as this kingdom weakened under pressure from the advancing Assyrians, a second kingdom of Judah emerged with its capital at Jerusalem.[2] Modern estimates place the population of ancient Palestine at a maximum of around one million. According to Israeli archeologist Magen Broshi, "... the population of Palestine in antiquity did not exceed a million persons. It can also be shown, moreover, that this was more or less the size of the population in the peak period - the late Byzantine period, around AD 600"[3] Similarly, a study by Yigal Shiloh of The Hebrew University suggests that the population of Palestine in the Iron Age could have never exceeded a million. He writes: "... the population of the country in the Roman-Byzantine period greatly exceeded that in the Iron Age...If we accept Broshi's population estimates, which appear to be confirmed by the results of recent research, it follows that the estimates for the population during the Iron Age must be set at a lower figure."[4] After the Babylonian conquest in 597 BCE the Samaritans emerged as a people in Palestine, and the Phoenicians expanded along the coastal plain. With the successive waves of return of the Israelites from exile in the mid-5th century BCE, by the time of Ezra (~458 BCE) Palestine consisted of the returnees, the people of Samaria and other Jews who had remained behind, the related Samaritans[1], and "the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians and the Amorites. For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons, so that the holy seed have mingled"[5]. From that point on there is no further mention in the Bible of living Canaanites. At the start of the Hellenic period, Jews therefore dominated the population of Palestine, with an ancestry prime of which was Canaanite, plus lesser contributions of Aegean (Philistines), Egyptian, and Syrian and Mesopotamian (Amorites). Map Land of Canaan
Excellent, well done HB. You have busted two of the Zionist myths just by checking a reference. See how easy it is to do so? 1) You now know that the Palestinians are descendants from the Canaanites. You have verified the information yourself. [So are the Jews, but they left home 2000 years ago, so their claim is INFINITELY weaker] 2) You have also verified that, other than for a thin strip along the east bank of the Jordan, by far the bulk of Jordan was never Canaanite. The British were therefore perfectly correct in rejecting it as part of the territory for the Jewish homeland in Palestine. Well Done!!
I just realised that you didnt study all of the relevant information. So I added more from the same reference and I have highlighted the juicy bits in red below .... that's all, just highlighted pieces from the reference that you used. Help Jonsa to join the dots between them. So far we therefore have that the Jews evolved out of the Canaanites and some time after the period of Ezra (not 500+ years earlier as you once claimed, in the time of Solomon) they had been completely absorbed by the Jews. But the fascinating story continues. You shouldnt have stopped there. Let me help provide more cherries. You left out what happened to this Palestinian population dominated by Canaanitic Jews. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Palestine: OK, so about half of them left their homeland voluntarily drawn by the lure of trade and commerce. What happened to the other half who stayed behind? [same HB reference] There we have it. They dwindled away because they converted to other faiths as a result of the Roman clamp-down that followed the revolts of 66-70 CE and 132-135 CE. Wait before we leave that, lets check if it is confirmed: [same reference] Is there perhaps yet further confirmation of the conversion of the Jews who were not lured away by trade and commerce? [same reference used by HB]: What happened to those Jews who converted to the Pagan and Christian faiths, leaving a minority of Jews in the wake of their switch? [same reference as HB used]: Oh, Oh, those Canaanitic Jews who became Pagans or Christians after the rebellions against Rome, converted to Islam. That is supported by the evidence of the Rabbi Dov Steins testimony in Tzvi MiSinais videoclip [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPkLWlylISM see 02:50mins] that even 200 years ago Jews were still converting. The Ottoman census in the late-19th C shows hundreds of thousands of Muslims but only ten thousand Jews in Palestine. The convertion to Islam was almost total. And those hundreds of thousands of Muslims in Palestine are the grandparents of the Palestinians evicted by the Zionists in 1948-1950. So there you have it: Canaanites --> Jews --> Pagans and Christians --> Muslims --> Palestinians. The dots have been joined. The Palestinians are the Canaanites who stayed at home throughout the millennia. The Jews are their brothers who were lured away. And none of this is my invention, HB. It all comes from the reference that you used.
snakestretcher, et al, I think you make a very valid point, but not a compelling point. To be fair, your point is supported by: While Israel (or the US for that matter) are not signatory to the ICC Statues, I have to agree that the language can be interpreted against the Israeli position. Having said that, there is a "very" strong prima facie case for the allegation; resting on the fact that their has not been a compelling military need defined for the settlements. It is fairly clear that the State of Israel cannot maintain the settlements indefinitely, nor can it annex the territory; absent a negotiated settlement. (COMMENT) There are two points, in mitigation, I would like to make. The first point is that from the very beginning of the Settlement Program, everyone understood this was going to be problematic for the Israeli. The Israeli must have had an underlying latent agenda that in someway justified the program. My "thought" would be that it was a failed attempt to pressure the Palestinians to the negotiating table. This strongly suggest that the Israeli made a huge mistake, and over time compounded that mistake. The second point is on the settlements themselves. In the Oslo Accords, there were several major topics that were excluded from the Declaration of Principles, The Permanent Status of Refugees, Jerusalem and its use (both sides wanted it as its capitol), Security arrangements, Settlements. Both negotiators separated these issues. And there was a 5 year expectation that the Oslo process would bring to an end the occupation. It did not. It does not appear that there is a comprehensive attempt for an end to the occupation because there is no reasonable assurance that the withdraw of Israeli Forces, behind the Green Line (Armistice Lines) would reduce hostilities and result in a peaceful settlements. It is almost impossible to capture bilateral policy and framework that would have lead to peace. Neither the Israeli or the Palestinian were truly interested in a comprehensive peace settlement. It was plain then, as it is plain now, that the Palestinian did not truly recognize the sovereignty of Israel and was advocating both Jihadist Action (Article 13 of the HAMAS Covenant -- "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.") and a hostile Feday'een Action (Article 9 PLO/PNA Charter: "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.") wanting the entire territory that was formally under the Mandate of Palestine. Today, there is a new possibility for an agreement. The framework needs to broadly agree upon the Declaration of Principles under Oslo, but the principles that were taken off the table. This would include, not just that which I mentioned, but also reparations, restitution and compensation (legitimate claims on both sides). By comprehensive -- I mean it must resolve the substantive issues in dispute. This has not happened yet. And, we need to have an unbiased (not America) to underwrite the agreement and act as a guarantor and arbitrator of disputes the always arise in the implementation. In these issues, neither side has clean hands. As HAMAS says; "It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Kissam" (founder of the Black Hand). Most Respectfully, R
THE STATUS OF JUDEA & SAMARIA ~by Hbendor Under the norm of International Law, the status of Judea & Samaria could only be considered "occupied" by Israel, if, in fact they had previously belonged to another sovereign state… Jordan, as everyone knows, never existed prior to 1946, it gained control over the West Bank of the river Jordan and East Jerusalem in 1948, by an act of naked aggression against the newly RECONSTITUTED State of Israel. No country in the world apart from Great Britain (which created Jordan by fiat in the first place), and Pakistan recognized this annexation. This invasion did not give it legal title under International Law. In 1967, following Jordan's second all out renewed and failed try for a new invasion of Israel and its consequent loss of Control over Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem in that attempt... The juridical situation returned to what it had been previously since the League of Nations Mandate… Israel is therefore not occupying these areas, as they never belonged to Jordan or any other Arab country historically IN THE FIRST PLACE. The question is… If Judea, Samaria are not "occupied territory,” what then are they? One of the foremost International Legal Scholars, former Under-Secretary of State Eugene Rostow, describes these lands as the " unallocated parts of the British Mandate still governed by the original provisions contained in THE ORIGINAL MANDATE FOR PALESTINE that was sanctioned by the League of Nations in 1922. One of these provisions, Article 6, of the Mandate for Palestine allowed " close settlement...." of all western Palestine by the Jewish People, as Eastern Palestine was by then wrested away ignominiously from the Mandate by the then British Colonial Secretary Mr. Winston Churchill for the creation of the ARTIFICIAL Palestinian/Arab Emirate named Trans-Jordan now called Jordan. The Jewish settlements in these areas are the physical link of the People of Israel, with the Land of Israel from " Time Immemorial," a link that stretches back to the Bible, the Balfour Declaration, and its International recognition in the PREAMBLE of the Mandate for Palestine, that was confirmed by the League of Nations in 1922. Quote:- Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish People with Palestine.... Etc. Unquote. No one can dispute Israel's right to return and redeem this part of its MOTHERLAND, be it Judea, Samaria or any other part of the Mandate, for this right is firmly implanted in International Law, Archeology, Historical Association, Security and Political Justice. P.S. ARTICLE 6 The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other section of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.
Putting aside the irrelvance of archaeology (we've been through this a dozen times) and history we are left with international law. Mr. Rostow does not represent international law; he represents your purely emotional rationale. International law, including those of the United Nations which include all the provisions of the Geneva Conventions which Israel is a signatory to, are routinely being violated by Israel. You know this, and the United Nations has made innumerable resolutions condemning Israel's actions vis-a-vis the Palestinian population. Israel continues, in the face of global condemnation, to violate international law and human rights. Those same laws and rights it is obligated to uphold and observe as signatory to them. But all of this is just fine because of some spurious archaeology and tenuous historical links to the region? Jews were largely absent from, and were a clear minority in the region for 2000 years. Yet you claim this is enough justification for their relentless theft of another people's land? For your information nobody cares about 'time immemorial'. They care about today and the daily injustices perpetrated by the Israeli government. In time those injustices will come to an end when the patience of right-thinking peoples, globally, is exhausted. Israel will then be free to build a wall around itself and remain isolated from the rest of the civilised world.
snakestretcher, et al, The "daily injustices perpetrated by the Israeli government" is a matter of perception and a view to the stability of the Palestinian people. Right-Thinking people might be those that "refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens." (PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE) General Policy: Article 9 Palestine National Charter of 1968: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. Article 10 Palestine National Charter of 1968: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. Article 13 The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) 18 August 1988: There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Article 15 The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) 18 August 1988: The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. (COMMENT) What the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) calls "apartheid," is the active suppression and quarantine of elements that pledged in the past, have demonstrated in the past and present, and continue in organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating, activities that threaten regional peace. In the interest of peace and in the absents of a peace accord, the continued occupation of territory under the influence of HAMAS and FATAH is justified. To cooperate fully in the fight against terrorism, in accordance with our obligations under international law, in order to find, deny safe haven and bring to justice, on the basis of the principle of extradite or prosecute, any person who supports, facilitates, participates or attempts to participate in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or provides safe havens. To ensure the apprehension and prosecution or extradition of perpetrators of terrorist acts, in accordance with the relevant provisions of national and international law, in particular human rights law, refugee law and international humanitarian law. We will endeavour to conclude and implement to that effect mutual judicial assistance and extradition agreements, and to strengthen cooperation between law enforcement agencies. What if the Palestinian Authority Collapses? Most Respectfully, R
Do I have to cow tow to your irreverent and useless insinuations? Mr. Rostow (make a search and learn who the man is) before throwing your invectives towards him and us.. I do not believe there is a people called 'Palestinians'... Never existed... They are Arabs and 20% of Israel inhabitants... That you have a fixation because you have Muslim friends who feed you garbage, is your problem and not Israel's. This is not your business and do not point your crooked finger of indignation towards us, clean your own backyard first and befriends 7 Millions Muslims that will overwhelm you... I will not shed a tear if they do.
In case you hadn't noticed the UN has made it their business to point to Israel's serial law breaking activities, and with good cause-because they have the law behind them. Israel's belligerence has created terrorists who bomb Britain because, for whatever reason, our governments have been supporting you. If your country's actions result in mine being the target for terrorism, you can be damned sure I'll make it my business to voice my considerable displeasure as often and as loudly as I can.
