timeline
Let's talk about Acts of War --
#1.
The residents of ALL Ottoman-occupied Palestine in 1890 are the native Palestinians. That group of natives included Moslems, Christians, Jews, Ba'hai, Copts, Circassians, Samaritans, Armenians, you-name-it. At the time, the definition of "Palestine" was all-encompassing, and only in the 1920's did the San Remo Conference establish boundries (using the Sykes-Picot lines).
Of course, as history indicates, fully 75% of the San Remo "Palestine lands" were lopped-off and given to a Bedouin clan of Hashemites, while the jews made do with a few enclaves on the coastal plain, as the British enforced jewish immigration quotas (
yet countless hundreds of thousands of arabs from surrounding areas poured into the land, and became 'instant palestinian natives').
So, in context, we must recall that Hashemites 'occupied' Palestine.
They still do. The Kingdom exists on lands that until 1922 were considered an integral part of the Jewish Homeland (as envisioned in the Balfour Declaration, which formed the basis for the Mandate).
#2.
The idea of escaping a coming anti-semetic wave of destruction in Europe was a prime motivation for Herzl. He saw the anti-jewish reactions of Europeans in the streets of Paris while covering the Dreyfuss Trial, and realized what the Europeans were capable of. As things turned out, he was 100% correct.
Zionism was/is not evil. The movement of modern Zionism was founded on principles of peaceful cooperation and economic development in a land largely neglected.
Did Zionism envision that the 'natives' would suffer? What evidence is there that in the period of the half-century 1890 - 1940 the presence of jews caused any native suffering or displaced them? I can show evidence that the opposite is true... certainly we acknowledge that bedouin / fedayyin marauding and anti-jewish brutality was rampant. And we know that the arab land-owners welcomed the jews, and these land-owners took the opportunity to dispose of their desolate scrub parcels, gladly, at inflated prices. By 1944, jews were paying arab sellers over $1000 an acre for arid or semi-arid land that had lain fallow for centuries. At this same time, lands of real value with rich black soil in the State of Iowa (USA) were selling for 1/10th of that price.
There is nothing inherently wrong with a "Return to Zion" of the Jewish people, who, for thousands of years and yes, until this day, consider the land our homeland. Is it justifiably our homeland? Or is the arab claim to palestine so much stronger that it trumps us?
HAMAS says that the muslim claim is rightful, while the jewish claim is bogus.
That is the islamic logic that leads me to believe that this is not about land, and not about 'occupied land' -- it is about religious fervor and religious power, and that jihad is the ongoing war, not specifically with Israel as a land, but with ALL infidels.
#3.
So, here we are, after TWO world wars, in which the inhabitants of the entire globe have been subjected to vast upheaveals and countless millions died, and a few hundred thousand arabs have to shift around several miles, as a result of yet another war being waged
in their names to eradicate the jews. Exactly at this same time, a few hundred thousand jews also shift out of their homes across the mideast, and are accepted by Israel. They neither know the language, the food, the dress, nor the jobs of the modern State of Israel. Yet, until today, they have managed in their own fashion to adapt. (see: Iraqi jewish community, Iranian jewish community, Moroccan jews, Egyptian jews, Syrian jews, Lebanese jews, Tunisian jews, Yeminite jews and even now, the Falasha jews of Ethiopia)
Israelis left gaza and are preparing to leave most of the west bank.
However, that will not satisfy the jihadists.
You want to know why?
Because Israel isn't going to return 100% back to the 1949 Rhodes Armistice Lines, and by that standard, is still an occupier! And as such, attacks will continue!
Watch and see...
The game is on.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/723677.html
