IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Huh?
...
Within the decade of the 1930\ufffds, Palestine receives approximately 232,000 Jewish immigrants. The Jewish population in 1939 numbers over 445,000 out of a total population of about 1.5 million, nearly 30% as compared to the less than 10% twenty years earlier. Similarly, by 1939, Jewish land holdings had risen by four-times to almost 1.5 million dunums of the total area of 26 million dunums.
...
1945: Zionist pressure in the U.S. increases with the involvement of Congressmen, and President Harry Truman calls upon the British government to open up the gates of Palestine to an additional 100,000 homeless European Jews.
...
1948: On 22 September, Israel adopts the \ufffdArea of Jurisdiction and Powers Ordinance\ufffd, which absorbs, de facto, almost half of the land allocated to the Arab state which were occupied by Israeli forces.
...
[link|http://www.palestine-un.org/info/imp.html|http://www.palestin...nfo/imp.html]

And that's just for openers ;-)
New lets start over (good points though)
Prior to 1948
1. What was the borders of Palestine
2. Who was the non colonial rulers of Palestine(i know the brits ran it)
3. In 1948 who asked for non Jews to Leave?
thanx,
bill
There is no difference between a "settler," "soldier," "secular," or "Chassidic Jew." The target is the JEW.
\ufffd Harvey Tannenbaum
New Okay.
1. See [link|http://www.un.org/Depts/dpa/qpal/maps/M0082c.gif|http://www.un.org/D...s/M0082c.gif] and picture all the green and red as "Palestine". (Also see: [link|http://www.mideastweb.org/PalPop.htm|http://www.mideastweb.org/PalPop.htm] for population studies)

2. Did anyone really "rule"?
See: [link|http://www.archiveeditions.co.uk/Leafcopy/557-0.htm|http://www.archivee...py/557-0.htm]
It was a very messy place.

3. From: [link|http://www.pij.org/zarticle.htm?aid=4247|http://www.pij.org/...htm?aid=4247]
>>>SNIP
First, as far back as the end of 1948, came the creation in
the Ministry of Finance of a special "Custodian of Abandoned
Property" mechanism. While in 1949 the name was changed to
the "Custodian of Absentee Property," the mechanism did not
deal only with property abandoned by refugees or with
properties which had really been abandoned. Those
Palestinians who had not left their homeland even for a
moment, but were absent by choice or by free will from certain
lands (perhaps in order to be on other lands which they
owned)--- all lost the lands from which they had been
"absent." One of the most famous examples of forced absence
was seen in the large villages of what is called "the
southern triangle" (in the eastern Sharon area of central
Israel, abutting the Jordanian border). The Arab lands there
became battlefields during the war and were divided.


In 1949, in the framework of the armistice with Jordan, these
villages were transferred to Israel and farmers found
consolation in having their fields united again within the
State of Israel. They were soon to find, however, that they
had the status of "present absentees." The fact that they had
not worked their fields in 1949 served as proof of the fact
that they did not meet the requirements of Israel's "Law of
Abandoned Property" of May 14, 1950. They were, accordingly,
declared "absentees" and temporarily forfeited their
ownership rights to the property.


This "blow" was not restricted to farmers in the area of
Tireh, Taibeh and Kufr Qassem, who were never to be able to
return to the property and land from which they had been
expelled during the fighting. The Law was applied generally
to almost every Arab settlement in Israel. Thousands who had
been in neighboring villages or at work in town, or even
visiting relatives in areas which looked safer as they were
further away from the fighting, became "present absentees."
The Law of Abandoned Property made nearly 20 percent of the
Arabs in Israel into absentees, regardless of their
citizenship.
>>>SNIP

That about cover it?
bcnu,
Mikem
New Good, getting somewhere
Did the jews appropriate property? Of course. Did the Arabs accumulate property? Of course.
The map of course refers to one of the 3 British Mandates a political division under which the arabs were part of the hashemite kingdom.
Yup that about covers it.
thanx,
bill
There is no difference between a "settler," "soldier," "secular," or "Chassidic Jew." The target is the JEW.
\ufffd Harvey Tannenbaum
New ROFL!
Not even a mention of the hashemite king whos land it was!!!
just a tad one sided web site I think.
thanx,
bill
There is no difference between a "settler," "soldier," "secular," or "Chassidic Jew." The target is the JEW.
\ufffd Harvey Tannenbaum
New lets use a more unbiased link
[link|http://www.kinghussein.gov.jo/his_arabrevolt.html|rulers of palestine]
"Consequently, in June 1916, as head of the Arab nationalists and in alliance with Britain and France, Sharif Hussein initiated the Great Arab Revolt against Ottoman rule. His sons, the emirs Abdullah and Faisal, led the Arab forces, with Emir Faisal\ufffds forces liberating Damascus from Ottoman rule in 1918. At the end of the war, Arab forces controlled all of modern Jordan, most of the Arabian peninsula and much of southern Syria.

Sharif Hussein\ufffds objective in undertaking the Great Arab Revolt was to establish a single independent and unified Arab state stretching from Aleppo (Syria) to Aden (Yemen), based on the ancient traditions and culture of the Arab people, the upholding of Islamic ideals and the full protection and inclusion of ethnic and religious minorities. Arab nationalists in the Fertile Crescent and the Arabian Peninsula found in the Hashemite commanders of the Great Arab Revolt the leadership that could realize their aspirations, and thus coalesced around them."

One Kingdom from Syria to Yemen under the rule of the hashemite King, now what percentage of that land mass is 1967 Israel?
very tiny.
the web site doesnt mention palestinians as a separate entity, they are refered to as Arabs subject to the King in Jordan(who doesnt want them either)
thanx,
bill

There is no difference between a "settler," "soldier," "secular," or "Chassidic Jew." The target is the JEW.
\ufffd Harvey Tannenbaum
New more stuff on who "rules" the west bank
"On April 11, 1950, elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine from further Zionist expansion."
linked in my earlier post.
Jordan is the recognised government of the west bank, not the PLO.
Do the Palestinian Arabs need a state of their own?
At this point in History, yes.
They should work with the current ruler, Jordan a little more peacefully.
thanx,
bill

There is no difference between a "settler," "soldier," "secular," or "Chassidic Jew." The target is the JEW.
\ufffd Harvey Tannenbaum
New That's NOT the question.
>>Do the Palestinian Arabs need a state of their own?

Wrong question. The question is "Did Israel ever need to be created?"
The answer, I think, is "no" given that Palestine existed for more than 2,000 years with Jews and Arabs living together.
New So the question remains
Is there anyplace on this earth that Only Jews can consider who controls Jews,
once again, apparently not.
thanx,
bill
There is no difference between a "settler," "soldier," "secular," or "Chassidic Jew." The target is the JEW.
\ufffd Harvey Tannenbaum
New That's an interesting position.
Somebody needs to give me a country because I don't want to have to share power with the people how had the bad taste to be in power where I was born.

Is that it? I know, let's divy up the US so that the German-Americans, Polish-Americans, Black-Americans, Latino-Americans, Russian-Americans, Laotian-Americans, Chinese-Americans, Scottish-Americans, Irish-Americans, etc., can all have their own countries and can all be ruled by their own race.

Oops, I have that wrong. This is a religion thing, isn't it? We need a United State of Catholics, United State of Atheists, United State of Baptists, United State of Semites, United State of Muslims, United State of Amish, United State of Lutherans, etc., right?

And here I thought that our problem was religion creeping into our government when the real problem was that we weren't a theocracy.
New dont think so
The gentile world has a bad habit and history of killing Jews. In Europe and Russia it has been the national sport since about 400 ad. Folks get a tad tired of it.
thanx,
bill
There is no difference between a "settler," "soldier," "secular," or "Chassidic Jew." The target is the JEW.
\ufffd Harvey Tannenbaum
New Have to diverge form your otherwise logical
and kinda reasonable progression..

As to your final question and illustration (by exaggeration - often a useful way of seeing). I'm with Bill at this stage.

Jews are different!

And yes, I recognize that such a claim is the frequent cop-out of the unarmed in a discussion. Thus one has to say 'why'. And I believe that the persecution of 'The Jew' is indeed as old as Bill's arbitrary date. I wouldn't even try to limn some 'why': the phenomenon may be as much about (what we call) 'Western' built-in xenophobia as anything else. And while neither 'side' can be rationalized as blameless: in most other contretemps since we started writig down history.. some respite has always been found. Not So re 'The Jews', I'd assert.

But whatever it's 'about' - it is clear enough to me that Jews are indeed a Special-Case\ufffd, especially as viewed by the Western AND Arab worlds (dunno about the Orient - but you are surely more aware of the anti-Semitism in USSR, than anyone else here).

The Holocaust, unique surely in scale and in so brief a time-span - underscores the universal ingrained, actively inculcated irrationality. No other cult, sect, tribe, group! can come close to the obloquy (and the sterotypes - even from Bill S. Shylock Lives! in the prejudices of masses). Are Gypsies / the Rom #2?

They NEED a spot free from 'forced integration' with oppressors over millennia.. at least until all sides / the species: matures beyond its present perennial adolescence in all things. IMhO. (Maybe the replacement of Pop-theology with something less barbaric - will also have to occur, before any growth can be imagined? That can apply to Jew and non-Jew alike..)



Ashton
New Different perhaps, but not unique.
Usually, however, when a people has been subjected to the intensity of oppression the Jews have long suffered, they are simply wiped from the face of the earth. (We need look no further than the history of various tribes of native people on our own continent to see that this is so).

That the Jews have been able to survive at all is indeed remarkable. However, I do not understand how their plight justifies allowing (even supporting) their forced occupation of a separate nation-state.

Mildly OT: I've often wondered exactly how much of the US support for the creation of Israel was owed to anti-Semitism in this country. I think a case could be made that we only wanted the creation of a "Jew Country" so that the Jews displaced from Europe wouldn't land here.

I don't claim to know what the best solution is. But I think that allowing a group to forceably remove another from its historical home on account of a sense of "collective guilt" is not the best course of action.
New They are unique in another regard...
Their (Jewish) history makes up our (any Christian or Muslim) religious history. To disregard this, as well as the history of the Jewish people starting from the Babylonian conquest (which, by the way, happened at a time when the joint was called Judea, Israel, Dan, etc... NOT PALESTINE) and including the holocaust, the Inquisition, et al... To disregard this may make your claim that they are not "unique" valid. The Indians did not have a "written" history which is preached throughout the European and American and Muslim world on a daily or weekly basis... If they did, perhaps they would have been a little more "unique" as well.

Israel, the nation, was perhaps founded as you suggest, as a way for Judeo-Christian/Muslims to assuage their collective guilt and ensure the "not in my backyard"... The Palestinians, Jews who never left the region, were wronged when the British left (shades of India/Pakistan/Afghanistan anyone?) and when Israel was arbitrarily created. The problem they face now, is not solvable in a conventional sense. They lost a "real war" in the late '40's which sealed their fate. They have been allowed to stay, merely through the collective guilt of the "West" pressuring Israel to ease up and not do what they will do in the next two years with the excuse (justifiable?) that they are merely fighting a war on terrorism. The more "martyrs" that strap bombs on the backs and jump onto crowded buses, the quicker the Palestinian problem goes away...

Right or wrong, Israel is armed to the teeth and the US and NATO will absolutely side with Israel should this war continue to escalate and especially if some other country gets involved. The Palestinians have a tough choice, stay and continue to count on the "goodwill" of the Israelis and the West or leave... or die.
To answer your question about "I do not understand how their plight justifies allowing (even supporting) thier forced occupation of a separate nation-state"... I can explain that, we (the US) gave them money, the Russians (through their anti-semitism) gave them the educated numbers, and now... right or wrong from inception (just like the US), they are armed to the teeth and will fight anyone who tries to mess with them. The surrounding Arab nations rightfully fear them now. They have earned their right to stay, just like every other nation that survives... Militarily.
Just a few thoughts,

Screamer

"I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..."

P. Townshend

"Nietzsche has an S in it"
Celina Jones
New Lots has been written, even right chere
re the 'status' of the nearby territory between 1900 and '48. The Brits have parcelled out land in many other areas of the world too, when the Raj was rampant.

There's a precedent for these (ever arbitrary) divisions eventually being accepted. Note how artificial are our own boundaries. Exception: people living on an island; but - there's Haiti and Santo Domingo! so.. no exceptions.

It's too late to erase '48 - and that was just THREE years after.. people walked into Belsen and Auschwitz and Maidanek and Dachau, Treblinka, etc. Undoubtedly a major factor in deciding: I mean, what MORE impetus than a holocaust (??) might suggest either,

1) (Our usual) Flush the problem down the toilet: finish the genocide, OR

2) Give these people a place where they might be somewhat safe from 'us'.

I'd prefer to believe that #1 was never seriously contemplated, even if it WAS 'contemplation' by homo-sap.



Ashton
New Anti-semitism today
There is alot of racism, human rights violations etc. in the world today. If I had to list problem countries my list off the top of my head would be (in no particluar order) Sudan where slavery still exists, China, Syria, the Taliban (until they lost power), North Korea, Iraq, Somalia, Saudia Arabia etc. Yet when the world met to dicsuss racism and human rights in Durban, most of the condemnation was directed at Israel. It is laughable for countries like Saudia Arabia to call Israel racist, when in Saudia Arabia, women have no rights, non-Muslims are prohibited by law from being citizens, it is illegal to bring in any no Muslim religious articles, Christian prayer gatherings are banned etc. For all its flaws Israel is a multi-ethnic, multi-racial society and is probably the only country in the Middle East where Arabs can truly exercise the right to vote.

The only conclusion that I can draw, from what happened at Durban, is anti-semitism.

Likewise the Arab press today is viciously anti-semitic, here are some links:

[link|http://www.memri.org/sr/SR00602.html|A New Antisemitic Myth in the Arab Press: The September 11 Attacks Were Perpetrated by the Jews]

[link|http://www.memri.org/sd/SP33902.html|Egyptian Government Weekly Reproduces Nazi Propaganda Forgery]

[link|http://www.memri.org/sd/SP32201.html|Egyptian Government-Sponsored Scientific Journal: On American and Israeli Bio-Warfare and Jews Spreading AIDS to Asia and Africa]

[link|http://www.memri.org/sd/SP32101.html|Saudi Government Daily: The Jews are Taking Over the World]

[link|http://www.memri.org/sd/SP27601.html|Friday Sermon on Palestinian Television]


These are just the tip of the iceberg, so yes, I believe that anti-semitism is unique.
New Just remember that you don't
overcome an adversary by becoming just like him.
New Re: "The Holocaust, unique surely in scale and in so brief
a time-span."

Really? Then you never heard [link|http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/archives/ukra.html|Ukraine famine of 1932-33.] The reference says 6-7 million people starved. I've read 8 million in other places. This is not fiction. My father literally walked around bodies in the street. Your buddy (Joseph Vissarionovich Djugashvili) Stalin did this while there was actually a good wheat harvest in the Ukraine. The method was different, the motivation was different, but not the results. More people killed in less time. Communism can be so efficient. But, nobody seems to know about it! Bad PR? Definitely no museum in Washington, D. C.

I do not for a moment want to take anything away from what has been said about the Holocaust. While luckily not destined for extermination, just slave labor, my parents and I and one of two younger brothers survived a Nazi concentration camp and then a German work farm. But, the Holocaust was not exclusive to Jews you know. And, no one better deny the Holocaust in my presence. The skeletal faces of my parents on their Nazi issued ID cards are still fresh in my mind. No Hollywood movie about the subject you have ever seen have comes close to depicting the walking skeletons of the camps.

It sucks big time to be oppressed, for whatever reason.

What is my point? The Jews are not different.

On the flip side, do you think "incursions" into "Arab-controlled areas" using F-16s, helicopter gunships, and tanks against the Palestinian Arabs who have no such weapons is different from the Nazi's invasion of say Poland which still had a cavalry? So you can have and keep their land? So you can brutalize and humiliate them because you are the master race? Give me a break. With the current government, Israel is morally bankrupt. I would be ashamed to be an Israeli. This is not to say there are none working for peace. But, they are a small minority.
Alex

"People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of
thought which they avoid." -- Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
New You are right..
And there's no point in quibbling about +/- millions. Watcha you mouth though - Iosip no buddy of mine, nor do I imagine that what he wrought .. bore any slight resemblance to that 'communal' idea(l) - for which the species was and is: thus far emotionally incapable. 'Communism' - that it never was! Pure BS, that.. Fascism under rubric of 'social-ism'.

What I don't recall (if I knew) was - whether the starvation was simply an "acceptable overhead" (to Stalin's vicious mind) for obtaining the grain - or his intent was overtly: to kill off a group he deemed undesirable. Nothing was beyond his warped mind.

Whatever was that black motive, I'd still assert that the Jews are and ever were the Universal Pariah - as no Kulak or other ethnic from the Steppes could ever be (in the eyes of the world, generally). They appear to fulfill the need, from some defective gene in homo-sap - for a whipping boy for every current folly a group has created for itself (say, by the sort of Jingoistic rhetoric we are hearing daily - right now?)

Note, as mmoffitt's post linked, in War forum (!) how we are daily told that ~"these guys mean to destroy us" [as if that were remotely possible!] and: it sells so far; excuses any next excess from the massive intellect of Dubya/Cheney, the [oil pipeline] twin entrepreneurs.

And yes: the disparity in weaponry re Israel / Palestinians is quite like.. that in Afghanistan, no? In fact: no one in the world can come close to *US* armaments - by orders of magnitude. So.. Which of us is er least-immoral, then? Might is close enough to Right, if it's Our Might?

Rationalizations. Endless hypocrisy to gain power and KEEP it. Not merely his-story but Our-story. Possible only after great damage has been done to language itself, via endless repetition of slogans and patent lies. Infotainment + circuses.



Ashton
who always wonders if we all Can survive the Mercantile mind, drugged into full-greed mode.

New The Famine was to destroy the Kulaks
Stalin wanted no part of small independant farmers with the history of fierce adherence to their land. The grain was shipped east in an effort to depopulate the Ukraine. I met with folks as a child that survived in the woods as partisans against the nazis and later the communists until escaping to the west. The Germans treated slavs as brutally as jews in a careless manner but the extermination of slavs by the nazis was not considered as paramount as the extermination of the jews.
It is my heretical view that in order for the State of Israel to be created a Hitler was needed to provide the impetus for our home. Without Hitler the "independent" state of Israel would not exist. He does move in mysterious ways.
thanx,
bill
There is no difference between a "settler," "soldier," "secular," or "Chassidic Jew." The target is the JEW.
\ufffd Harvey Tannenbaum
     YAN in the neighborHOOD - (boxley) - (38)
         They won't. - (mmoffitt) - (33)
             yup watched Pat the other night - (boxley) - (32)
                 I don't have a dog in this fight, but, ... - (mmoffitt) - (31)
                     Definitions - (boxley) - (20)
                         Huh? - (mmoffitt) - (19)
                             lets start over (good points though) - (boxley) - (2)
                                 Okay. - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                                     Good, getting somewhere - (boxley)
                             ROFL! - (boxley)
                             lets use a more unbiased link - (boxley)
                             more stuff on who "rules" the west bank - (boxley) - (13)
                                 That's NOT the question. - (mmoffitt) - (12)
                                     So the question remains - (boxley) - (11)
                                         That's an interesting position. - (mmoffitt) - (10)
                                             dont think so - (boxley)
                                             Have to diverge form your otherwise logical - (Ashton) - (8)
                                                 Different perhaps, but not unique. - (mmoffitt) - (4)
                                                     They are unique in another regard... - (screamer)
                                                     Lots has been written, even right chere - (Ashton)
                                                     Anti-semitism today - (bluke) - (1)
                                                         Just remember that you don't - (mmoffitt)
                                                 Re: "The Holocaust, unique surely in scale and in so brief - (a6l6e6x) - (2)
                                                     You are right.. - (Ashton)
                                                     The Famine was to destroy the Kulaks - (boxley)
                     Always had been Palestine???? - (bluke)
                     Let us think about what you said... - (bluke) - (8)
                         Disturbing. - (mmoffitt) - (7)
                             Hardly surprising - why disturbing? - (Ashton) - (4)
                                 I said disturbing, not incomprehensible. - (mmoffitt) - (3)
                                     That may be precisely, "the rub" ! - (Ashton) - (2)
                                         Marx thought we couldn't overcome the drunkeness. - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                                             Then we are agreed on the odds. :( -NT - (Ashton)
                             Why?? - (bluke) - (1)
                                 Re: confounds them? It pisses them off! :) -NT - (a6l6e6x)
         Re: YAN in the neighborHOOD - (a6l6e6x)
         Dry bones cartoon - (boxley) - (1)
             Re: Dry bones cartoon - (a6l6e6x)
         At least I understand your sig now. -NT - (static)

I seem to remember a rather Stupid rendition sometime back.
114 ms