Any 'pro-Palestinian' atheists here?

Thunder said:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf3.html#b

My source is the Jewish Virtual Library, and they said 9%.
Click to expand...

Read further.

Nearly 9% of the land was owned by Jews and about 3% by Arabs who became citizens of Israel.
Click to expand...

=12%

And that's 9% of the land allotted to the Jews by the partition plan, NOT 9% of the total land of Palestine.
Click to expand...

No, that was land actually owned by Jews and Arabs. It was allotted to them because they owned it. Same thing with the 18% that remained to the Palestinians who owned it(in what is now Israel), but they abandoned it/were forced out due to the war.

and frankly, suggesting that the British Mandate "owned" the great majority of the land of Palestine, is pure and pathetic colonial thinking.
Click to expand...

Well, since the Ottomans were overthrown, the British took control. The land -has- to go to some governing party, hence the British, as they were the occupying power. And it wasn't in 'Palestine', it was in 70% of what is now Israel. This does not include Gaza, or the Westbank.

Why do you think it was handed over to the Jews? Could it be they had a better governing body set up than their Arab counterparts? I'm not sure myself. You tell me.
 
IDB87 said:
Well, since the Ottomans were overthrown, the British took control. The land -has- to go to some governing party, hence the British, as they were the occupying power. And it wasn't in 'Palestine', it was in 70% of what is now Israel. This does not include Gaza, or the Westbank.

Why do you think it was handed over to the Jews? Could it be they had a better governing body set up than their Arab counterparts? I'm not sure myself. You tell me.
Click to expand...

#1. Colonial powers have NO right to decide that the land belongs to them. The land belongs to the NATIVE people as a whole, if not to individual land owners.

#2. It was handed over to the Jews because they had a much more sophisticated and well-funded lobbying campaign, and they had lots more friends in powerful places, within the USA, Britain, and France.

#3. From 1922 to 1947, Palestine included present day Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza.
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
#1. Colonial powers have NO right to decide that the land belongs to them. The land belongs to the people as a whole, if not to individual land owners.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you care to speculate who the land should have gone to? Was there a ruling class in Palestine that was ready to take over?

#2. It was handed over to the Jews because they had a much more sophisticated and well-funded lobbying campaign, and they had lots more friends in powerful places, within the USA, Britain, and France.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. Could they also have had more initiative than the 'Arab farmers' they had as neighbors? I guess the easiest way to do this would be to compare Jewish leadership with Arab leadership at the time. Most of the jobs delegated by the British to Judges and local councilors was taken care of from Instanbul prior to the fall of the Ottomans, for example.

#3. From 1922 to 1947, Palestine included present day Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza.
Click to expand...

And prior to 1922 the land known as Palestine included Jews and Arabs and was owned by the Ottomans. What's your point?
 
Last edited:
IDB87 said:
Perhaps you care to speculate who the land should have gone to? ?
Click to expand...

um..maybe the native population!!!!

what a crazy idea huh?

IDB87 said:
And prior to 1922 the land known as Palestine included Jews and Arabs and was owned by the Ottomans. What's your point?
Click to expand...

prior to 1922, the Jews made up only 10% of Palestine. an insignificant number, especially when it should have come to deciding which populatiom should get land.

clearly, if the Allied powers after WW1 were just and honest, they would have given ALL of the Middle East, to the native population. Just as the Austro-Hungarian Empire was divided up the best they could, based on the local native populations.

The only thing they did wrong, when dividing up Austria-Hungary, is they forgot to give the Jews their own state. But ofcourse, the Zionists were determined to get a state in Palestine, not where 10 million Jews actually lived, in Central and Eastern Europe.
 
Thunder said:
um..maybe the native population!!!!

what a crazy idea huh?
Click to expand...

You have dodged this part of the question since I've asked it:

Who, specifically, should have been in charge of the land? You can say 'native population' as much as you want, but farmers are farmers. Most of the 'leaders' in Palestine had a very limited scope as far as being 'rulers' went. Like I said, most of the regions' issues were decided in Istanbul, not locally.

And besides: Don't the Jews make up part of the local population?

prior to 1922, the Jews made up only 10% of Palestine. an insignificant number, especially when it should have come to deciding which populatiom should get land.
Click to expand...

And more Jews immigrated to Palestine over the next two decades. Your obvious xenophobia is becoming nasty. Besides, the land these immigrants settled in was already owned by Jews.

There was also an increase of Arab migrations at this time, legal and illegal. Do they factor into this equation?
 
IDB87 said:
You have dodged this part of the question since I've asked it:

Who, specifically, should have been in charge of the land? You can say 'native population' as much as you want, but farmers are farmers. Most of the 'leaders' in Palestine had a very limited scope as far as being 'rulers' went. Like I said, most of the regions' issues were decided in Istanbul, not locally.

And besides: Don't the Jews make up part of the local population?

Your obvious xenophobia is becoming nasty.

---edited---
Click to expand...

sure. After WW1, the allies should have turned Palestine into a democratic state. and if it was gonna be an ethnic nation-state, it should have clearly been an Arab one, as Arabs made up 90% of the population.

but, we all know, the Allies had other plans.

....oh, and thanks for the "xenophobia" comment. I guess that could also be applied to your clear disregard for the rights of Arab peoples, to rule their own land and decide their own fate.
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
sure. After WW1, the allies should have turned Palestine into a democratic state. and if it was gonna be an ethnic nation-state, it should have clearly been an Arab one, as Arabs made up 90% of the population.
Click to expand...

Parky, the governing infrastructure was-not-there. It did not exist. There was a 'higher' class of Palestinian Arabs, but they had no clue about running a state. Nation building does not happen over night.

Factor in Jewish and Arab immigration over the next two decades, and you get a population ratio that's a little tighter than your 90/10% difference. Now, they have to be factored in, and they were, much to your chagrin.

Call it unfair, but that is what happened. No nefarious plots needed.

but, we all know, the Allies had other plans.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:
 
IDB87 said:
Factor in Jewish and Arab immigration over the next two decades, and you get a population ratio that's a little tighter than your 90/10% difference. Now, they have to be factored in, and they were, much to your chagrin.

Call it unfair, but that is what happened. No nefarious plots needed.
Click to expand...

the Arab population of Palestine between 1922 and 1947, increased at the EXACT same natural growth rate as the Israeli-Arab population from 1948 to 2008. No mass immigration of Arabs to Palestine took place. This is a blatant and long-ago debunked lie.

yes, it was unfare to promise Palestine to the Jews in 1917 and 1922, especially when they only made up 10% of the population.

was it a "nefarious" plot? no. it was just a colonialist plan to have a land that was occupied by a native people, become the nation-state of a group of non-natives from hundreds and thousands of miles away.
 
Thunder said:
sure. After WW1, the allies should have turned Palestine into a democratic state. and if it was gonna be an ethnic nation-state, it should have clearly been an Arab one, as Arabs made up 90% of the population.

but, we all know, the Allies had other plans.
Click to expand...

So you didn't agree with me when I corrected you before?
 
MarkCorrigan said:
Um, what?

No, that isn't what the mandate did at all Parky. It's why it was formed, but it wasn't what it did. Where the hell did you pull that one from?

The Balfour declaration wasn't a ruling, merely a summary of the opinions of the British cabinet of the time, and it certainly wasn't a declaration that the area was to be given to the Jews. Indeed, Britain signed the Anglo-French Declaration of November 1918 the next year which made clear that the area would be given to the native Arabs, not the jews.

Further, when the Mandate was formed in order to smooth progression into a Jewish state (ratifying the declaration, which prior to this wasn't actually worth a great deal, the sentiments had changed. Ever heard of the Peel Commission? I have. It declared that the Mandate was a bad move, and instead the region should be divided into two, a Jewish state and an Arab one. This was later ratified by the UN, and the UN partition plan was given the full green light.

The British, unable to decide what to do after the UN effectively washed their hands of the affair, decided to spontaneously disband the Mandate and ran away from the area. The new Jewish leadership under Ben-Gurion declared independence in the same year.


Britain was never all that dedicated to the founding of a Jewish homeland in the region, they merely stated it was the preferred option, when it started to get hard to do thanks to the US, they gave up. Meanwhile the League of Nations/UN ratified anything that was passed on to them.
Click to expand...

Literally the previous page Parky.
 
Thunder said:
the Arab population of Palestine between 1922 and 1947, increased at the EXACT same natural growth rate as the Israeli-Arab population from 1948 to 2008. No mass immigration of Arabs to Palestine took place. This is a blatant and long-ago debunked lie.

yes, it was unfare to promise Palestine to the Jews in 1917 and 1922, especially when they only made up 10% of the population.

was it a "nefarious" plot? no. it was just a colonialist plan to have a land that was occupied by a native people, become the nation-state of a group of non-natives from hundreds and thousands of miles away.
Click to expand...

Jews live there now (and always have to some degree) and they are there to stay. Deal with it, live with it, accept it. Talk all you want about the British mandate and so on but none of that justifies an ethnic cleansing campaign against them or justifies denying Jews to immigrate from places like Yemen, Iraq, or Ethiopia or other places where they surely would have been killed if they would have stayed.
 
portlandatheist said:
Jews live there now (and always have to some degree) and they are there to stay. Deal with it, live with it, accept it.
Click to expand...

are you saying we should NOT be discussing the history of Israel and Zionism?

do the facts bother you?

and btw, I support the two-state solution. that means Palestine AND Israel.
 
Dennis Prager
The Middle East Problem
http://prageru.com/15.htm

If the Arab/Muslims would put down their weapons, there would be no conflict.
If the Israelis would put down their weapons, there would be no Israel.

It is that simple, but some refuse to see.
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
the Arab population of Palestine between 1922 and 1947, increased at the EXACT same natural growth rate as the Israeli-Arab population from 1948 to 2008. No mass immigration of Arabs to Palestine took place. This is a blatant and long-ago debunked lie.
Click to expand...

Do you pick and choose which facts you favor? Your Jewish Library claims the Arab population had been dwindling, and Arab immigration had actually increased as the land was developed. Surely if it was debunked you will be able to reference a source? We are all willing to learn.

yes, it was unfare to promise Palestine to the Jews in 1917 and 1922, especially when they only made up 10% of the population.
Click to expand...

False distinction. All of Palestine was never promised to the Jews. I see you have read what MC posted. Very good.
 
IDB87 said:
Your Jewish Library claims the Arab population had been dwindling, and Arab immigration had actually increased as the land was developed. Surely if it was debunked you will be able to reference a source? We are all willing to learn.
Click to expand...

hmmm....I guess you never heard of the Virtual Jewish Library huh? Its a major website, started in 1993.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/

and you want me to provide evidence that the BS of mass immigration to Palestine by Arabs, Joan Peters favorite historic revisionism, has been debunked?

no problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_Time_Immemorial#Controversy_and_criticism

In a response to the criticisms raised by Daniel Pipes (and Ronald Sanders) in the March 27, 1986 issues of the New York Times Book Review, Porath argued that the available figures and sources do not indicate a "supposed quintupling" (as argued by Peters)[14] or "a substantial immigration of Arabs to Palestine"[14] (as argued by Pipes). While Porath notes that "the Arab population of the coastal area of Palestine grew faster than it did in other areas,"[14] Porath argues this "[m]ore reasonably...confirms the very well-known fact that the coastal area attracted Arab villagers from the mountainous parts of Palestine who preferred the economic opportunities in the fast-growing areas of Jaffa and Haifa to the meager opportunities available in their villages"[14] rather than, as argued by Pipes, the European advancements brought by and "economic opportunity created by the Zionists."[14]
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom