pro-Palestinian thread, part 2

[Dissonance]

@Dick_Dastardly

But I’ll ask you the same question; bearing in mind that the state of Israel was founded on ethnic cleansing and terrorism, and seeing as how the government of Israel in the 1950s was comprised of Jewish terrorists responsible for various massacres of Palestinians as part of their ongoing campaign to establish a state, and that even after Oslo when Israel was forced to take some legal responsibility for their occupation Palestinians are still being ethnically cleansed, intimidated, murdered etc. by Israelis with almost no protection from the Israeli government, isn’t it just possible that in the 1950s when terrorists ran Israel and had no legal obligation to uphold the rights of Palestinians that the ethnic cleansing that goes on today was going on then, perhaps on an even more widespread basis than today?

That’s a rather longwinded way of saying you’ve got nothing.

I’m talking about Palestinians who lived in Israel and were ethnically cleansed/murdered in the 1950s/60s. The ethnic cleansing has continued since 1948 and continues (unarguably) today, but was much more prevalent in the 50s and 60s.

So show some of this prevalent ethnic cleansing that happened all through the 50s and 60s. All you’ve managed to produce is a massacre in a border village in '56 that Israelis were jailed for and Israel paid reparations for and a cross border raid into Jordan in '53 in retaliation for cross border attacks going the other way. Ugly incidents to be sure, but hardly ethnic cleansing. One incident happened on the border and the other inside Jordan. Neither is proof of this massive under-the-radar ethnic cleansing consisting of hundreds of incidents that you claim occured in the 50s and 60s. That 20% of Israelis are Arab is rather proof that this ethnic cleansing didn’t occur, no?

[Sevastopol]

@Captain_Amazing

I’m not an apologist for ethnic cleaning, but what do you want? … My pity’s for the Israelis. …

This is the source of the problem; Reacting emotionally. Instead a principled response is appropriate. Firstly all peoples should be treated equally. Respected when at peace. Their rights preserved. And sanctioned when criminal.

Sadly the current issues are: Settlements and Ethnic Cleansing, ie. crimes. Settlers, being looters should be shot on sight. What is the principled response to ethnic cleansing? A military response to the armed forces engaging. Then, trial and execution of the political leadership followed by consideration to dissoving the rogue state. That is what we do.

Curiously there is an oppposing argument that Israelis should be treated unequally. The principled approach should be abrogated in favor of something else. The best explanation for this appears to be that the Israelis are not morally competent, but degenerates. They cannot be held to the same standards as everyone else. Of course this is anti-semitism. It pays to be alert to this and oppose it at every turn.

[Shodan]

@tclouie

Your characterization of Corrie’s death is cruel, callous, and according to witnesses at the scene, factually wrong. But the bulldozer driver was even more cruel and callous.

Actually, no - even a left-wing source like Mother Jones says the IDF

makes a “credible case that the operators, peering out through narrow, double-glazed, bulletproof windows, their view obscured behind pistons and the giant scooper, might not have seen Corrie kneeling in front of them.”

Cite-a-roonie.

It was only a matter of time before a Darwin Awards fan posted here. The thing about the Darwin Awards is that they make fun of people who simply made mistakes, or who were risk-takers who would have been lauded as gutsy had their luck been a little better. I have a very low opinion of those who make fun of the dead, or even celebrate their deaths as something positive for humanity.

And I have an even lower opinion of people who play chicken with IDF bulldozers.

Of course it is to Israel’s credit that the soldier who murdered Hurndall was convicted and sent to prison.

But I can’t help but wonder…was justice secured in this case mainly because Hurndall was a foreigner, and a white European?

ISTM that justice was done because pressure was brought to bear on Israel to abide by principles of justice and act.

Which is why I asked for cites of Hamas doing the same. Why do you suppose the pressure is so one-sided, that Israel should do the right thing but Hamas and Hizbollah are not required to do the same?

[ul][li]IDF sniper kills a civilian[/li][li]Clamor against Israeli disregard for human rights[/li][li]Investigation (after much pressure) and prison time for the soldier killing the civilian[/ul][/li]Contrasted with
[ul]Hamas kills civilians
[li]crickets chirping[/ul][/li]Regards,
Shodan

[Dick_Dastardly]

@Dissonance

That’s a rather longwinded way of saying you’ve got nothing.So show some of this prevalent ethnic cleansing that happened all through the 50s and 60s. All you’ve managed to produce is a massacre in a border village in '56 that Israelis were jailed for and Israel paid reparations for and a cross border raid into Jordan in '53 in retaliation for cross border attacks going the other way. Ugly incidents to be sure, but hardly ethnic cleansing. One incident happened on the border and the other inside Jordan. Neither is proof of this massive under-the-radar ethnic cleansing consisting of hundreds of incidents that you claim occured in the 50s and 60s. That 20% of Israelis are Arab is rather proof that this ethnic cleansing didn’t occur, no?

What about all the other stuff I posted? What about the ethnic cleansing of Jaffa and elsewhere based on a law passed in 1950?

[XT]

@Dick Dastardly

What about all the other stuff I posted? What about the ethnic cleansing of Jaffa and elsewhere based on a law passed in 1950?

Jaffa, though close to modern day Tel Aviv WOULD have been part of the Palestinian territory according to the UN plan…which was unfortunately rejected by the Palestinian’s. It was taken by pre-Israeli paramilitary groups in an effort to secure defensive territory. The city was a mixed population of Arab’s, Christian’s and Jews prior to this (the majority were Jews btw, though there was a substantial Arab population as well), and indeed during the combat Jewish paramilitary groups attacked Arab civilians…and indeed it was with the intent of driving some of them from the city. It was part of a cycle of violence that had started decades earlier with Arab’s (and everyone else, seemingly) attacking Jews (which, ironically, caused the creation of groups like Irgun and the Haganah), and they in turn attacking Arab’s and Brits.

It was not one of Israel’s brighter moments, as even they admit. But context is everything, and you have to look at the events that unfolded in the light of both the previous history and what was going on when this event happened.

I found your own cites HIGHLY skewed (imagine that), and suggest you start with this one instead, as it seems at least marginally more balanced

Some historical context:

Arab Riots and Jewish immigration - In the spring of 1920, spring of 1921 and summer of 1929, Arab nationalists opposed to the Balfour declaration, the mandate and the Jewish National Home, instigated riots and pogroms against Jews in Jerusalem, Hebron, Jaffa and Haifa. The violence led to the formation of the Haganah Jewish self-defense organization in 1920. The riots of 1920 and 1921 reflected opposition to the Balfour declaration and fears that the Arabs of Palestine would be dispossessed, and were probably attempts to show the British that Palestine as a Jewish National home would be ungovernable. The major instigators were Hajj Amin El Husseini, later Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and eventually a Nazi collaborator, and Arif -El Arif, a prominent Palestinian journalist. The riots of 1929 occurred against the background of Jewish-Arab nationalist antagonism. The Arabs claimed that Jewish immigration and land purchases were displacing and dispossessing the Arabs of Palestine. However, economic, population and other indicators suggest that objectively, the Arabs of Palestine benefited from the Mandate and Zionist investment. Arab standard of living increased faster in Palestine than other areas, and population grew prodigiously throughout the Mandate years. (see Zionism and its Impact). The riots were also fueled by false rumors that the Jews intended to build a synagogue at the wailing wall, or otherwise encroach upon the Muslim rule over the Temple Mount compound, including the Al-Aqsa mosque. The pogroms led to evacuation of most of the Jewish community of Hebron. . The British responded with the Passfield White Paper. The white paper attempted to stop immigration to Palestine based on the recommendations of the Hope Simpson report. That report stated that in the best case, following extensive economic development, the land could support immigration of another 20,000 families in total. Otherwise further Jewish immigration would infringe on the position of the existing Arab population. However, British MPs and the Zionist movement sharply criticized the new policy and PM Ramsay McDonald issued a “clarification” stating that Jewish immigration would not be stopped.

Some context of what was happening when the city was initially seized:

Pre-Independence - During the period before Israeli independence was declared, two armies of Arab irregular volunteers, let by Haj Amin El Husseini in the Jerusalem area, and by Fawzi El Kaukji in the Galilee, placed their fighters in Arab towns and conducted various aggressive operations against the Jewish towns and village under the eyes of the British. Kaukji and his irregulars were allowed into Palestine from Syria by the British, with the agreement that he would not engage in military actions, but he soon broke the agreement and attacked across the Galilee. The Arab irregulars were met by the Zionist underground army, the Haganah, and by the underground groups of the “dissident” factions, Irgun and Lehi.

In Jerusalem, Arab riots broke out on November 30 and December 1 1947. Palestinian irregulars cut off the supply of food, water and fuel to Jerusalem during a long siege that began in late 1947. Fighting and violence broke out immediately throughout the country, including ambushes of transportation, the Jerusalem blockade, riots such as the Haifa refinery riots, and massacres that took place at Gush Etzion (by Palestinians) and in Deir Yassin (by Jews). Arab Palestinians began leaving their towns and villages to escape the fighting. Notably, most of the Arab population of Haifa left in March and April of 1948, despite pleas by both Jewish and British officials to stay.

The British did little to stop the fighting, but the scale of hostilities was limited by lack of arms and trained soldiers on both sides. Initially, the Palestinians had a clear advantage, and a Haganah intelligence report of March, 1948 indicated that the situation was critical, especially in the Jerusalem area. It is generally agreed that April 1948 marked a turning point in the fighting before the invasion by Arab armies, in favor of the initially outnumbered and outgunned Jewish forces. To break the siege of Jerusalem, the Haganah prematurely activated “Plan Dalet” - a plan prepared for general defense that was supposed to have been implemented when the British had left. It required use of regular armed forces and army tactics, fighting in the open, rather than as an underground. It also envisioned the “temporary” evacuation of Arab civilians from towns in certain strategic areas, such as the Jerusalem corridor. This provision has been cited as evidence that the Zionists planned for the exodus and expulsion of Arab civilians in advance. The Haganah mounted its first full scale operation, Operation Nahshon, using 1,500 troops. It attacked the Arab villages of Qoloniyah and Qastel, occupied by Arab irregular forces after the villagers had fled, on the road to Jerusalem and temporarily broke the siege, allowing convoys of supplies to reach the city. Qastel fell on April 8, and the key Palestinian military commander, Abdel Khader Al-Husseini was killed there. Qoloniyeh fell on April 11. In the north, Fawzi El-Kaukji’s “Salvation Army” was beaten back at the battle of Mishmar Haemeq on April 12, 1948. These successes helped convince US President Truman that the Jews would not be overrun by Arab forces, and he abandoned the trusteeship proposal that the US had put before the UN earlier. Following attacks by Arab irregulars, the Irgun attacked the Arab town of Jaffa, just south of Tel Aviv. Palestinians fled en masse despite the pleas of the British to remain.

-XT

[Dick_Dastardly]

@xtisme

Jaffa, though close to modern day Tel Aviv WOULD have been part of the Palestinian territory according to the UN plan…which was unfortunately rejected by the Palestinian’s. It was taken by pre-Israeli paramilitary groups in an effort to secure defensive territory. The city was a mixed population of Arab’s, Christian’s and Jews prior to this (the majority were Jews btw, though there was a substantial Arab population as well), and indeed during the combat Jewish paramilitary groups attacked Arab civilians…and indeed it was with the intent of driving some of them from the city. It was part of a cycle of violence that had started decades earlier with Arab’s (and everyone else, seemingly) attacking Jews (which, ironically, caused the creation of groups like Irgun and the Haganah), and they in turn attacking Arab’s and Brits.

It was not one of Israel’s brighter moments, as even they admit. But context is everything, and you have to look at the events that unfolded in the light of both the previous history and what was going on when this event happened.

I found your own cites HIGHLY skewed (imagine that), and suggest you start with this one instead, as it seems at least marginally more balanced

Some historical context:

Some context of what was happening when the city was initially seized:

-XT

Ah, context. If you’re really interested in showing context you need to go back to 1880ish when the Zionist movement started sending settlers/money to Palestine, and the Jewish population of Palestine was just 3%. If you imagine, say, the Hispanic population of America going from 3% of the US population to maybe a quarter in 50 years and then declaring a state then you could imagine there’d be some kind of similar reaction during the fifty years from the existing inhabitants. So yes, you have to put things in their correct context.

[Alessan]

Frankly, I think the common depiction of the Palestinians as innocent victims is an insult to the tens of thousands of brave Arab warriors who fought and died for their people in the 1947-1948 civil war.

[Dissonance]

@Dick_Dastardly

What about all the other stuff I posted? What about the ethnic cleansing of Jaffa and elsewhere based on a law passed in 1950?

What other stuff? Show me where the remaining Arab population in Jaffa was expelled from the city and Israeli lands during the 1950s. You won’t be able to because it didn’t happen. Those who left through force or fear or the urgings of thier own leaders left in 1948 during the war.

I see friend of Jewish people everywhere Sevastopol has appeared with his [del]final solution[/del] plan to combat antisemitism by shooting all the Jews. Not to do so would mean we think of them as degenerate vermin.

[Malthus]

@Dick_Dastardly

Ah, context. If you’re really interested in showing context you need to go back to 1880ish when the Zionist movement started sending settlers/money to Palestine, and the Jewish population of Palestine was just 3%. If you imagine, say, the Hispanic population of America going from 3% of the US population to maybe a quarter in 50 years and then declaring a state then you could imagine there’d be some kind of similar reaction during the fifty years from the existing inhabitants. So yes, you have to put things in their correct context.

My home city of Toronto has gone from “majority White multi-generation Canadians” to “majority multi-ethnic immigrants” in my lifetime.

Are you suggesting it is a good idea and totally justifiable for me to start an anti-immigrant riot now?

[Jackmannii]

@Dick_Dastardly

If you imagine, say, the Hispanic population of America going from 3% of the US population to maybe a quarter in 50 years and then declaring a state then you could imagine there’d be some kind of similar reaction during the fifty years from the existing inhabitants.

The Jewish population of Palestine declared a state? Who knew? I always thought it was the U.N. backed by the major powers of the time that created states of Palestine and Israel.

I don’t participate in these threads much any more, but it’s eye-opening to see how history changes over time.

[Alessan]

@Dissonance

What other stuff? Show me where the remaining Arab population in Jaffa was expelled from the city and Israeli lands during the 1950s. You won’t be able to because it didn’t happen. Those who left through force or fear or the urgings of thier own leaders left in 1948 during the war.

For the record, Jaffa still has a very large Arab population, perhaps even a majority.

[Dick_Dastardly]

@Dissonance

What other stuff? Show me where the remaining Arab population in Jaffa was expelled from the city and Israeli lands during the 1950s. You won’t be able to because it didn’t happen. Those who left through force or fear or the urgings of thier own leaders left in 1948 during the war.

I see friend of Jewish people everywhere Sevastopol has appeared with his [del]final solution[/del] plan to combat antisemitism by shooting all the Jews. Not to do so would mean we think of them as degenerate vermin.

I didn’t say they were. I said that, following a law passed in 1950, Israel began slowly removing Palestinians from their homes and their land. Not in one huge operation like the ones in 1948 but case-by-case, house-by-house. And that still goes on today!

And if you’re living in your house and all of a sudden the war comes to town, and you’re urged to evacuate to avoid getting yourself killed, does the fact that you temporarily leave your home mean that you give up all ownership of it?

[Dick_Dastardly]

@Malthus

My home city of Toronto has gone from “majority White multi-generation Canadians” to “majority multi-ethnic immigrants” in my lifetime.

Are you suggesting it is a good idea and totally justifiable for me to start an anti-immigrant riot now?

Since all those immigrants tuned up have they formed any terrorist groups and started bombing and shooting the multi-generation Canadians with the aim of setting up their own state in Toronto?

[Dick_Dastardly]

@Jackmannii

The Jewish population of Palestine declared a state? Who knew? I always thought it was the U.N. backed by the major powers of the time that created states of Palestine and Israel.

I don’t participate in these threads much any more, but it’s eye-opening to see how history changes over time.

Would it make any difference to the disenfranchised American people, being herded into 22% of the historical USA, who declared that the state existed? I’m pretty sure they’d still be upset about the whole thing either way. Enough to consider fighting back using the weapon of the weak, terrorism.

[XT]

@Dick Dastardly

Ah, context. If you’re really interested in showing context you need to go back to 1880ish when the Zionist movement started sending settlers/money to Palestine, and the Jewish population of Palestine was just 3%. If you imagine, say, the Hispanic population of America going from 3% of the US population to maybe a quarter in 50 years and then declaring a state then you could imagine there’d be some kind of similar reaction during the fifty years from the existing inhabitants. So yes, you have to put things in their correct context.

Do you have a cite for the 3% figured (from an unbiased source)? I’ve always heard 10-15% (throughout Palestine, much more concentrated in some areas, such as Jerusalem).

Regardless, I’m unsure why you think it’s important. There was certainly a movement by the Jews to move back to what they considered their ancestral homeland starting in the 1800’s and continuing even to this day. So what? The Jews BOUGHT the land and lived under the Ottoman laws (and later British), paid their taxes…and periodically were attacked by various Arab groups in the region. Much of what is Israel today (and was part of the Ottoman empire during the period you mentioned) was pretty much barren desert at the time. It was unsuited to large scale agriculture, and by and large a bit of a back water for the Ottoman Empire. The Jews bought the land and managed to make something of it and many cases.

So yes, as I said before, context is everything. How about that cite for the 3% pre-1880’s? I’d like to see the context of that, since it’s contrary to my own understanding.

-XT

[Dick_Dastardly]

@xtisme

Do you have a cite for the 3% figured (from an unbiased source)? I’ve always heard 10-15% (throughout Palestine, much more concentrated in some areas, such as Jerusalem).

Regardless, I’m unsure why you think it’s important. There was certainly a movement by the Jews to move back to what they considered their ancestral homeland starting in the 1800’s and continuing even to this day. So what? The Jews BOUGHT the land and lived under the Ottoman laws (and later British), paid their taxes…and periodically were attacked by various Arab groups in the region. Much of what is Israel today (and was part of the Ottoman empire during the period you mentioned) was pretty much barren desert at the time. It was unsuited to large scale agriculture, and by and large a bit of a back water for the Ottoman Empire. The Jews bought the land and managed to make something of it and many cases.

So yes, as I said before, context is everything. How about that cite for the 3% pre-1880’s? I’d like to see the context of that, since it’s contrary to my own understanding.

-XT

The Population of Palestine: Population Statistics of the Late Ottoman Period and The Mandate (Ch 1, Table 1.4D) by Prof Justin McCarthy (Columbia University Press, 1990)

[Dissonance]

@Dick_Dastardly

I didn’t say they were. I said that, following a law passed in 1950, Israel began slowly removing Palestinians from their homes and their land. Not in one huge operation like the ones in 1948 but case-by-case, house-by-house. And that still goes on today!

So again, you have nothing at all to back up your claims of the ethnic cleansing of Jaffa or the rest of Israel. This 1950 law applied to those who had already fled/abandoned/been ethnically cleansed (take your pick) in 1948. They were not being expelled in the 1950s/60s. The Arab population in Jaffa has increased since 1950. If these hundreds of super double-secret under-the-radar actions of ethnic cleansing you claim occurred in the 50s/60s had happened, the Arab population in Jaffa should have dropped or been eliminated entirely, no? I mean what you actually said was

I’m talking about Palestinians who lived in Israel and were ethnically cleansed/murdered in the 1950s/60s. The ethnic cleansing has continued since 1948 and continues (unarguably) today, but was much more prevalent in the 50s and 60s.

And if you’re living in your house and all of a sudden the war comes to town, and you’re urged to evacuate to avoid getting yourself killed, does the fact that you temporarily leave your home mean that you give up all ownership of it?

When the nations that urged you to evacuate and took you in as refugees after they failed to drive the Jews into the sea continue to refuse to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist things get messy. More so when the fighting has ended in armistices intended to be interim measures followed by the signing of peace treaties, only no peace treaties are signed. More so when attacks/terrorism continue to happen after the end of the war. More so when a lot of these attacks are conducted by this refugee population. More so when Israel and its neighbors continue to go to full scale war with each other repeatedly.

Just to put the shoe on the other foot, what do you suppose would have happened to the ownership of Jewish houses had Israel lost the '48 war and their owners been driven into the sea?

[Bryan_Ekers]

Heya, Dick, indulge me and try this thought exercise:

1. Name one positive thing the Israelis have done. Saying “well, they’ve managed to resist their impulse to exterminate the Palestinians, so far” doesn’t count.

2. Name one negative thing the Palestinians have done. Saying “well, they’re too tolerant of the Palestinians in their midst who want to negotiate with the Israelis” doesn’t count.

[Malthus]

@Dick_Dastardly

Since all those immigrants tuned up have they formed any terrorist groups and started bombing and shooting the multi-generation Canadians with the aim of setting up their own state in Toronto?

No; and neither have the locals attempted to murder them.

[XT]

@Dick Dastardly

The Population of Palestine: Population Statistics of the Late Ottoman Period and The Mandate (Ch 1, Table 1.4D) by Prof Justin McCarthy (Columbia University Press, 1990)

Dick, do you have a link to more than just the table? Here is a site I found on a quick google search that goes a bit better into the numbers and what they mean.

4. The century from 1850 to 1948 is fascinating, significant, and telling. We have already looked at this period from the point of view of the development of Zionism, the return of the Jews to Israel, and the British mandate. We are now going to look at the population of Palestine during this pre-state century, and consider the implications that population had for the birth of Israel. First we’ll look at the numbers, and then we’ll explain them.

  Year	       Arab Population	       Jewish Population
        1600	   250,000	                 5,000
        1850	   480,000	                 17,000
        1890	   530,000	                 43,000
        1922	   590,000	                 84,000
        1931	   760,000	                174,000
        1939	   900,000	                450,000
        1948	   980,000	                650,000
        1954	   192,000	                1,530,000
        1969	   423,000	                2,500,000
        1989	   843,000	                3,700,000
        1997	   1,120,000	              4,640,000

From 1850 until 1948, the Arab population of Palestine doubled, while the Jewish population increased forty times. Leaving birthrates aside, the question is this: What transformed Palestine, for the first time in almost twenty decades, from a place of limited, unstable, and fluctuating population to the hottest new suburb in the Middle East? The answer for both the Jews and Arabs is the same: immigration. The stimulus for immigration, however, was drastically different. The Jews came to Palestine to rebuild their homeland, and the Arabs came because Jewish development (along with British development after World War I) created a whole new economic reality filled with unprecedented opportunities. As the British and the Jews built new infrastructure in Palestine, as the business sector began to grow, and as the Jews developed an agricultural economy that went way beyond subsistence to export, Arabs flowed into the area in search of employment, stability, and opportunity. In addition to a surge in the agricultural sector, between 1917 and 1947 over 140,000 Arabs were employed by the British government in Palestine. Similarly, as the Jewish people further developed and modernized the economy and the country, the quality of life dramatically increased throughout Palestine.

-XT