The situation, in a nutshell

by on November 21, 2009 212
164sharesFacebook
4tweetsTwitter
21KstumbledStumbleUpon
17sharesReddit
0recommendGoogle
ror
Anna Baltzer, author, and Haithem El-Zabri, founder of the Palestine Online Store. Austin, TX, November 2008. [Photographer unknown]

About Adam Horowitz

Adam Horowitz is Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Israel/Palestine

{ 212 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. Citizen says:
    November 21, 2009 at 9:43 am

    Her sign should have read : “I’m from Austin, TX. Israel would pay me to move (with US tax dollars, directly or indirectly) to his land because I’m Jewish.” Sure the sign would be heavier to carry, but it would get the attention of more average Americans, especially in these economically deprived times here in the USA.

  2. potsherd says:
    November 21, 2009 at 10:22 am

    Conciseness is a virtue in signage.

    • Citizen says:
      November 21, 2009 at 11:20 am

      Is it? I think very often only if you are preaching to the converted. I’d agree to cut out
      “directly or indirectly” only in my revised sign. “With US tax dollars” is 4 more words, and would reach many more minds.

  3. otto says:
    November 21, 2009 at 10:47 am

    And this has been going on for about a hundred years.

  4. James North says:
    November 21, 2009 at 11:00 am

    A great picture, which is worth a thousand words.

  5. carnas says:
    November 21, 2009 at 11:01 am

    “I’m from Austin, TX. Because I’m a privileged and spoiled little girl with very little knowledge of history, I think all Jews have had a similar experience to mine, and therefore we can forget 2,000 years of persecution and come live in my little bubble. Unfortunately, I can’t actually house anyone or help out, but it’s good to know I make people feel warm and fuzzy because I side with the weak.”

    “I’m from Warsaw, Poland. Unlike the idiot with the sign next to me, I remember what’s happened to my family over the course of history. Oh, and I’m actually dead, along with millions of my brothers and sisters. There was no one to help us when we needed help – the idiot with the sign next to me thought things would somehow work out if Jews just tried to be like everyone else.”

    • Citizen says:
      November 21, 2009 at 11:23 am

      How about: “I’m a jew, I want the world to pay for what they did to us forever. The Pals are just the first, along with the US masses.”

      • carnas says:
        November 21, 2009 at 11:27 am

        Seeing as you consider what happened to the Palestinians in 1948 relevant, it’s somewhat contradictory to claim that what happened to the Jews at the same time isn’t. You might want to work on your reasoning skills.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 12:13 pm

          This coming from the guy who’s exploiting the Holocaust to score political capital? Wow, that’s hypocrisy even more blatant than Witty. I’m impressed.

        • Shmuel says:
          November 21, 2009 at 1:16 pm

          Um, what happened to the Palestinians in 1948 is still going on. What happened to the Jews a few years earlier isn’t. As long as we’re discussing reasoning skills.

        • Citizen says:
          November 21, 2009 at 1:53 pm

          Oh, you mean what happened to the jews in 1948 when they were trespassers? Or do you want to go way back to 1890 or so, when they were also trespassers? You need to work on your reasoning skills.

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 1:57 pm

          “What happened to the Jews a few years earlier isn’t.”
          Right, because if 2,000 years of history have taught us anything, it’s that persecution of Jews is something temporary and negligible.

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 1:59 pm

          The Jews were considered trespassers in almost every place they decided to settle. I’m assuming your conclusion is that they should have all been killed off. Thanks for clarifying that bit.

        • Shmuel says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:07 pm

          So why bring up Warsaw some 65 years ago? Why not Poughkeepsie, yesterday? If the past 60-odd years of history have taught us anything, it is that the State of Israel is the most dangerous place on earth for Jews, and to the extent that Jews have been targeted outside of Israel, it has generally had something to do with the “Jewish state”.

        • VR says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:55 pm

          Zionism is the proof that 2000 years has not been enough to teach some Jews anything, and specifically carnass and yonira are perpetual students of these lies and ignorance. Or as Buber lamented on his 80th birthday –

          “. . . the majority of the Jewish people preferred to learn from Hitler rather than from us. Hitler showed them that history does not go the way of the spirit but the way of power, and if a people is powerful enough, it can kill with impunity as many millions of another people as it wants to kill. “

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:57 pm

          Thanks for proving my point, VR. What we learned from the Holocaust is that Jews are entitled to protect themselves, and unfortunately, they can’t trust anyone but themselves to do so.

        • VR says:
          November 21, 2009 at 3:09 pm

          Than Sieg Heil and Deutschland Uber Alles carnass, but do not pretend that you and Israel are the bulwark against it, you have become it. Thanks for the honesty

        • VR says:
          November 21, 2009 at 3:59 pm

          I reprobate the idea that the Holocaust is a cover, or a blanket to throw over atrocities committed against others. It is disgusting and despicable practice which not only cheapens the memory of those who have died, but is meant to blunt the moral voice of authority of those suffering. The Never Again was meant to be applicable to everyone, and when it is applied to just one group it starts the process of atrocities all over again.

          WRONG LESSON

          If someone tries to lessen what is happening to the Palestinians in a comparison to the Holocaust here are the original words of Lemkin, not this cat and mouse definitive game played today that excuses everyone who does not goose step –

          “…destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves [even if many of the individuals in the group themselves survive]. The objective of such a plan would be the disintegration of political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of personal security, liberty, health, dignity…”

          This is not the denial of the death of approximately six million Jews, it is the confession that it falls under a much broader context. In other words there have been and are many genocides that have and are taking place. This same definition above is incorporated in the second article of the UN 1948 convention, which specifies 5 different categories of action which constitute the crime when applied “with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such.”

        • yonira says:
          November 21, 2009 at 4:50 pm

          and what was the excuse for Jewish persecution before that Shmuel? And in your Utopian world after Israel is destroyed, what will be the excuse for Jewish persecution then?

        • Shmuel says:
          November 21, 2009 at 5:27 pm

          Excuse, yonira? Do you think that Palestinians have “persecuted” Jews and that their suffering at Zionist hands is just an “excuse” to cover their Jew-hating Nazi asses? Your mon0lithic view of Jewish history as perpetual “persecution” (with or without “excuses”) by a single amorphous anti-Semitic blob is mind-blowingly anti-historical and anti-rational, not to mention more than a tad racist in and of itself.

        • Polly says:
          November 21, 2009 at 7:21 pm

          Carnas, the need for a safe-haven is an anachronism. You don’t NEED a homeland, you WANT and feel ENTITLED to one.
          The score in the recent Gaza war was 1400 to 3 – do you seriously think this was justified or that some greater good will come from these kinds of atrocities?

        • DisgustedOfTunbridgeWells says:
          November 21, 2009 at 9:34 pm

          The Jews had a homeland before Israel, they’re just very good at pretending it never existed (amusing, given their constant demands for ‘recognition’).

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 9:49 pm

          Really, what was that homeland? Their safe haven in England, from which they were expelled in 1290? Or maybe Spain, where they were persecuted until they were kicked out in 1492? How about Russia, where they were allowed to live only in certain areas?
          Some people choose to ignore history (or just never knew it).

        • DisgustedOfTunbridgeWells says:
          November 21, 2009 at 10:16 pm

          “Or maybe Spain, where they were persecuted until they were kicked out in 1492? How about Russia, where they were allowed to live only in certain areas?”

          Or maybe occupied Palestine? Where if you’re not the ‘right’ kind of Jew, you’re liable to face all kinds of unpleasantness.

          “Some people choose to ignore history (or just never knew it). ”

          Tell me about it.

        • Psychopathic god says:
          November 22, 2009 at 10:28 am

          does math count in the whole “reasoning skills” plaint?

          Didn’t Hebrews live prosperously in Egypt for 480 years before about 600 or 6000 of them stole goods from the Egyptians and fled to the desert with their booty?

          Didn’t Jews live in Spain, prosperously, for 500 years, before being asked to leave because Jews were not content to be important in the government, they wanted to own the government (see Prof. Ruderman and the poetry of Halevy)?

          Didn’t Jews live prosperously in Germany for perhaps as long as 900 years?

          Haven’t Jews lived prosperously in Iran for almost 2500 years, and didn’t Jews hold court from Baghdad from at least the 6th century BC until the 20th century?

          The world tires of the “Jews have been persecuted for 2000 years” meme; it’s historically inaccurate.

          Ask the little girl from Austin how ‘persecuted’ her life has been.

        • Psychopathic god says:
          November 22, 2009 at 10:37 am

          fascinating post on the Orange the other day:

          by Jeffrey Feldman
          Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 07:44:24 AM PST

          This morning I woke up to find an email response to my recent piece on Sarah Palin (“Don’t Get Palin’s Appeal? Try a Little Harder”):

          Thank you, I had forgotten why people like to stuff people like you into ovens………

          If you really think hard, you can figure out that “people like you” refers to my being Jewish, which this reader must have deduced from my last name, which sounds–Jewish.

          umm, no, Jeff, your name doesn’t sound Jewish, it sounds German.

          If you really think hard, you can figure out that some people might come to resent that their culture and history have been subsumed by another.

        • Colin Murray says:
          November 22, 2009 at 11:49 am

          This is an oft-neglected and very important point. If the goal of the establishment of Israel was to provide a safe haven from persecution for Jews, then the plan to achieve it is obviously flawed. Maybe its time to revisit the plan and find something that might actually work. Perhaps we have a case of mission creep, and Zionists need to do some soul-searching and clarify into what their objective has mutated, and change the plan to get back on track.

        • Colin Murray says:
          November 22, 2009 at 11:57 am

          ‘Were, were, were’ … what are the conditions NOW, and how is Zionism acting to ruin a good thing?

        • Colin Murray says:
          November 22, 2009 at 11:58 am

          This is an oft-neglected and very important point. If the goal of the establishment of Israel was to provide a safe haven from persecution for Jews, then the plan to achieve it is obviously flawed. Maybe its time to revisit the plan and find something that might actually work. Perhaps we have a case of mission creep, and Zionists need to do some soul-searching and clarify into what their objective has mutated, and change the plan to get back on track. [reposted in correct place]

        • Colin Murray says:
          November 22, 2009 at 12:01 pm

          Something is hosed with the reply system. Mine were in response to

          Shmuel November 21, 2009 at 2:07 pm
          If the past 60-odd years of history have taught us anything, it is that the State of Israel is the most dangerous place on earth for Jews, and to the extent that Jews have been targeted outside of Israel, it has generally had something to do with the “Jewish state”.

        • Colin Murray says:
          November 22, 2009 at 12:02 pm

          @ carnas November 21, 2009 at 9:49 pm

          ‘Were, were, were’ … what are the conditions NOW, and how is Zionism acting to ruin a good thing?

        • seeingformyself says:
          November 22, 2009 at 12:14 pm

          May I ask about Jews protecting themselves? I believe it’s Israel supposedly “protecting ” itself which they are doing with US money, my tax dollars. They seem to trust and rely on US aid and the US rubber stamp of support.
          Unfortunately, I believe they do trust the US…

      • carnas says:
        November 21, 2009 at 11:29 am

        And btw, it’s not about paying anyone. It’s about having one place in the world where Jews can be guaranteed they won’t be persecuted.

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 11:36 am

          Then they need another place, because I see Jews in Israel protesting all the time that the government is persecuting them.

        • Scott McConnell says:
          November 21, 2009 at 11:37 am

          “It’s about having one place in the world where Jews can be guaranteed they won’t be persecuted.”

          Carnas, if the United States began persecuting Jews, do you really think Israel would be secure? It’s one of the dafter thoughts of right-wing Zionism.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 12:14 pm

          ….except by other Jews, because we’ve all seen how people like you treat people like Shmuel and Phill Weiss and the other Jews with the backbone to speak out against Zionism.

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 1:00 pm

          Let’s see. Currently the Ba’hais are being persecuted. Obviously, they need a place where they will be safe.

          I think they all ought to move to Israel, kick the Jews out and establish a Ba’hai state where they will be guaranteed freedom from persecution.

          This is such a good idea! Who else is being persecuted these days?

        • edwin says:
          November 21, 2009 at 1:09 pm

          So if a Jew wishes to covert to another religion, or marry a non jew…

          Looks like the guaranteed safe place is only safe if you give up all personal freedom.

        • yonira says:
          November 21, 2009 at 1:16 pm

          The Ba’hais are more than welcome in Israel and have a beautiful world center in Haifa.

        • yonira says:
          November 21, 2009 at 1:17 pm

          Wow Edwin, you need to get a little more educated….

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 1:20 pm

          Kind of like the Ethiopian Jews were, yonira? Like… how even they needed to be “converted” to be real Jews? And boy have they been welcomed by their European Jewish brethren, huh.

          Oh yes. I’m sure even non-white non-Jews will be oh so very welcome in Israel.

        • Citizen says:
          November 21, 2009 at 1:56 pm

          Right, they just need that one special place where they can be the persecutors. Well, they’ve had it since 1948 with the blessings of the world. And, so now?

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:05 pm

          potsherd, you might want to try to find better examples. Israel is the only country in the Middle East where the Bahais aren’t persecuted.

          Israel haven for new Bahai world order
          link to bahaisonline.net

          link to en.wikipedia.org
          Bahá’ís continue to be persecuted in Islamic countries, as Islamic Leaders do not recognize the Bahá’í Faith as an independent religion, but rather as apostasy from Islam. The most severe persecutions have occurred in Iran, where over 200 Bahá’ís were executed between 1978 and 1998,[58] and in Egypt. The rights of Bahá’ís have been restricted in numerous other countries, including Afghanistan, Algeria, Azerbaijan, Indonesia,[84] Iraq, Morocco, and several countries in sub-Saharan Africa

        • yonira says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:05 pm

          Chaos, do you even know what I am talking about?

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:16 pm

          Actually, yonira, there is no real Ba’hai community in Israel. The shrines are tended by expatriot volunteers, and Israelis can not convert to the religion. There is no real immigration of Ba’hais to Israel, where they would become citizens with actual rights.

          But more to the point, Ba’hais in Israel are having to rely on others for their protection. Zionists insist that they can only rely on themselves, that no one can ever rely on another people for protection, Ever Again. The essence of Zionism is that Jews need their own state, where they will be the permanent majority. Maybe one day the Jews will kick the Ba’hais out of the country as the did the Arabs.

          Nope, for their own safety and protection, the Ba’hais need to evict all the Jews, as Zionism teaches them.

        • James Bradley says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:19 pm

          You guys are missing the point.

          The point is that the Bahais are a persecuted group. Its not a matter of Israel allowing a token number of Bahais build a community center in Haifa.

          What if the Bahai’s decided to kick out all the Jews to create their own safe haven in what is today Israel? Would you be ok with that? Based on the “persecution” logic that Israeli supporters use today, that would be ok.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:24 pm

          Yonira, I’m fairly confident even you don’t know what you’re talking about. Where do you get off expecting any better from me?

          I like Mr. Bradley’s metaphor a lot, actually. So, Yonira, if Ba’hai refugees decide they need to follow Zionism’s example and “partition” a chunk of land out of Israel as a safe haven for their persecuted minority, I expect you would support that?

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:25 pm

          carnas makes my point – the Ba’hais are a diaspora faith and persecuted in other states. Clearly, they need their own state. Since their holy places are located in Israel (and were there before the Zionist state) they should kick out all the Jews and pass a Law of Return to gather all 5 million Ba’hais into their own state so they will never again suffer from persecution.

          Or maybe the Jews will share? The UN can propose a partition, and the Ba’hais will get the coastal half of the country while Jews can have the West Bank. That’s the fair thing to do, right, carnas?

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:30 pm

          Credit where credit is due, actually, potsherd got there first it looks like. I read ahead. Mr. Bradley still deserves his share of credit, and myself? I wish I’d been clever enough to catch the double standard as quickly as you guys. :)

          And the question still stands. So when do the Ba’hai get their own nation state in the Holy Land? They need a safe haven. I mean, if Israelis reject the partition plan, well, the consequences are on their own heads and its something their grandchildren will just have to live with.

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:32 pm

          The problem with your analogy is that there are millions of Arabs in Israel and in the West Bank and Gaza. Doesn’t really reconcile with a decision to kick all the Arabs out, does it?
          The Palestinians (or at least their leadership) thought they were privileged to have all the land of Mandate Palestine, despite the fact that most of it wasn’t settled. They adopted violent methods to keep the Jews out (long before 1948), and cried foul only when they failed to kill or drive out all the Jews. Having to deal with the consequences of your decisions is a bitch, huh?

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:35 pm

          So, as your argument goes, because Nazi Germany didn’t actually kill every single Jew on the face of the Earth, the Holocaust never happened?

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:36 pm

          Yes, the Jews can live in refugee camps, and after a few generations, they’ll forget about wanting to return to that place they used to call Israel.

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:42 pm

          oh, it’s the old “land without a people” line!

          There are not, in fact, as many as a million Arabs in Israel. The Israelis realized at the last minute that the international community might object to a complete ethnic cleansing – it looks bad, you know – so they allowed a few thousand to remain in 1948, although most of their land was confiscated.

          And there are of course Arabs in the WB and Gaza, because that’s where a lot of the Arabs kicked out of Israel ended up.

          Maybe when the Ba’hais take over Israel they’ll let the Arabs back in.

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:44 pm

          Well, the Jews were privileged to be able to live in Europe for generations, so why should they complain?

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:46 pm

          There are 1.5 million Arabs in Israel, potsherd. Unless you’re living in some parallel universe (which, given the other nonsense you post, wouldn’t be all that surprising).

          link to en.wikipedia.org

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:49 pm

          No, potsherd, Jews weren’t able to live wherever they wanted to in Europe.
          Ever heard of the expulsion from Spain?
          link to en.wikipedia.org
          The expulsion from England?
          link to en.wikipedia.org
          How about the Pale of Settlement in Russia?
          link to en.wikipedia.org

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:53 pm

          No, potsherd, Jews weren’t able to live wherever they wanted to in Europe.
          Ever heard of the expulsion from Spain? The expulsion from England? How about the Pale of Settlement in Russia?

        • yonira says:
          November 21, 2009 at 3:05 pm

          Are we playing by normal Near East rules? If so, let them declare their state, and if they can defend it against Israel, then it’s theirs.

          IE Hama and the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria:
          link to en.wikipedia.org

          Might makes right in the Middle East and in most Islamic countries. Why should Israel be held to a different standard?

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 3:21 pm

          Very well, correction and gratuitous insult noted.

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 3:23 pm

          carnas, who obviously can not read, believes that someone said Jews could live wherever they wished in Europe.

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 3:28 pm

          yonira, that’s fine, but then the Jews don’t get to complain when the Ba’hais kick them out, just as they don’t grant the Arabs the right to complain now.

        • James Bradley says:
          November 21, 2009 at 4:21 pm

          If might makes right Yonira, then don’t complain when Hamas firestheir home made rockets into Sderot. After all might makes right? Right?

          Nevermind the racist assumption that ONLY in the Middle East does might make right…

          I love how they jumped to point #4. Everything Sucks!

          Its amazing how every single Zionut argument has been used here =P

          link to jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com

        • MRW says:
          November 21, 2009 at 6:39 pm

          The most severe persecutions have occurred in Iran, where over 200 Bahá’ís were executed…The rights of Bahá’ís have been restricted

          Oh, you mean the way Israel has persecuted, and restricted, the rights of Muslims of Israel and Gaza! Oh, I get it. One rule for the goose, another for the gander. So that’s how you justify the massacre of 1400 people in three weeks.

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 6:52 pm

          So really, we’re all agreed.

          Israel is the state created by a bunch of murderous thugs who threw the existing population off their land, and the next bunch of thugs to come along has just as much right to the damned place.

        • MRW says:
          November 21, 2009 at 6:53 pm

          (1) Muslims were ejected from Spain in the 1480s, ten years before the Jews in 1492.

          (2) The majority of Jews went to Constantinople, where they lived in peace with the Muslims for centuries.

          (3) A minority went to Portugal, where the Catholic King said within the year that they, too, had to convert to Catholicism, or leave. So the unconverted did.

          (4) The unconverted (Sephardic) Jews went to Amsterdam.

          (5) These Sephardic Jews In Amsterdam became involved in commerce and trade, and set off for the New World in ships. They landed in Curacao – first ones landed in the 1500s — where they started the slave trade, sugar, cotton, and other industries. Every Jew in the Americas (NYC, Recife Brazil, Montreal, Florida, Atlanta, etc) whose family has a 300-400 year history here is directly descendent from those original 12 families of Curacao.

          (6) The expulsion from England was because the Jews who were ejected sought to undermine the currency of the country.

          (7) The expulsion from the Pale had to do with revolution.

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 6:54 pm

          It doesn’t matter who is persecuting the Ba’hais, they get to take over Israel by force and kick out the Jews, just like the Jews did when it was Germany persecuting them, not the Palestinians.

        • MRW says:
          November 21, 2009 at 6:55 pm

          Too bad actual historical documents prove you wrong.

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 9:52 pm

          Great, MRW, now I’m just waiting for you to justify the holocaust, slavery, the destruction of the Native Americans, etc. etc.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 11:05 pm

          Carnas, I’m getting the impression you must be insane. Like, certifiably. MRW is recounting facts. Those are facts, not justifications. I can see how you can’t really tell the difference, though carnas, vis-a-vis your attitude toward the Holocaust and it being a free meal ticket for the Israelis to slaughter Arabs to their hearts content — because hey, there are millions of them and they have 22 countries! There will always be more lebensraum for the Zionist empire later.

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 11:19 pm

          Really? The following is a fact?
          “(6) The expulsion from England was because the Jews who were ejected sought to undermine the currency of the country.”
          How about some context? Some knowledge of history? That’s obviously too much to ask for around here.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 11:23 pm

          Like, say, the context of the King David Hotel bombing? Or how about the Lavon affair, later on? Like, that sort of context, Carnas?

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 11:37 pm

          Chaos, you were the one claiming MRW was recounting facts. He wasn’t. Don’t change the subject.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 11:53 pm

          I wasn’t. You were asking for context, weren’t you?

        • potsherd says:
          November 22, 2009 at 12:05 am

          hrmm

          MRW – there were indeed reported cases of coin-clipping in the 13th century where Jews were said to be involved, but the real issue was usery. People resented the debts they owed to Jewish bankers, and the king, as all kings, needed money. The easiest way to get money from bankers in medieval times was to kill the bankers and confiscate their money. This was true whether the bankers were Jews or not. Lending money to kings was a dangerous proposition.

          Some historians have suggested that the king also bought the loyalty of his knights and nobles by expelling the Jews, which conveniently canceled their debts.

        • wondering jew says:
          November 22, 2009 at 12:17 am

          mrw- Could you please supply some reference to support the contention that the Jews were expelled from England because of undermining of the currency.

        • wondering jew says:
          November 22, 2009 at 12:33 am

          Potsherd- “so they allowed a few thousand to remain in 1948, although most of their land was confiscated.” If there were approximately 140,000 Arabs (or Palestinians) left in Israel in the aftermath of the war, your description of them as a few thousand is false. Such antifactual glosses do not help your cause.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 22, 2009 at 12:50 am

          WJ? 140,000 were left, but how many of them also lost their homes and land, even if they weren’t put to death or driven beyond the borders like other Palestinians?

        • tree says:
          November 22, 2009 at 1:09 am

          According to IDF archival sources, only about 50,000 Palestinians were not originally driven out during or after the war (versus at least 750,000 who were), 40-50 thousand who were driven out were able to sneak back into Israel after the war, and Israel gained an additional 50,000 or so Palestinians who lived in the Little Triangle area that was ceded to Israel by Jordan during the Armistice negotiations in 1949. That accounts for the 140,000-150,000 figure you mention.

          One of the main reasons that the number of Palestinians left in Israel was high as it was ( even though it was less than 7% of the original Palestinian inhabitants), was because Israel balked at expelling the inhabitants of Nazareth, their numbers swelled by refugees from nearby villages, due to fear of a negative reaction from Western Christians.

          If you are going to complain about “anti-factual glosses” its best if you don’t do it from a glass house.

        • wondering jew says:
          November 22, 2009 at 1:35 am

          Tree- 50,000 is not a few thousand. Are you saying that Israel did not conquer the Little Triangle area and Jordan ceded the territory even though Israel did not “possess” it?

          Please provide a source for your information.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 22, 2009 at 1:45 am

          WJ, nothing you said has any sort of source whatsoever. Physician, heal thyself. I can tell you that tree is a hell of a lot more credible than you are.

        • tree says:
          November 22, 2009 at 2:06 am

          Yes. I’m relating history to you, WJ. Apparently you are unaware of it, or you would not be asking for a source.

          For want of time to give a more detailed and documented source, here’s a quicky from Wikipedia:

          “The [Armistice] agreement with Jordan was signed on 3 April 1949.[6] The main points:

          * Jordanian forces remained in most positions held by them in the West Bank, particularly East Jerusalem which included the Old City.
          * Jordan withdrew its forces from their front posts overlooking the Plain of Sharon. In return, Israel agreed to allow Jordanian forces to take over positions in the West Bank previously held by Iraqi forces.
          * Exchange of territory: According to Article 6 Israel received a territory in the area known as Wadi Ara and the Little Triangle in exchange for territory in the southern hills of Hebron.”

          link to en.wikipedia.org

          Here’s a copy of the agreement here:

          link to avalon.law.yale.edu

          “Tree- 50,000 is not a few thousand.”

          And 50,000 is not 140,000. That was my point. As an aside, how many survivors of Auschwitz were there? A few thousand? Or 30,000 or more?

        • wondering jew says:
          November 22, 2009 at 2:18 am

          tree- Thank you for the sources. I learn something new on this site regularly from people who are willing to share their knowledge with me. (Some share their knowledge willingly, others must include insults before sharing their knowledge with me, which is still better than others who just share insults but no knowledge.)

          I do not know how many survivors of Auschwitz there were and since I did not assert anything regarding the survival rate of Auschwitz, your reference is purely provocative.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 22, 2009 at 2:35 am

          Tree soundly rebuts your attempts to discredit him, and you turn around and accuse him of being provocative. For what? Daring to mention Auschwitz while not being a Zionist Jew? Anyway, you’re the one that’s playing a shell game with statistical data, and tree pinned you down for your spurious data.

        • MRW says:
          November 22, 2009 at 2:36 am

          WJ-Why dont you research this on your own? What’s wrong with you? This isn’t the Mondoweiss University where we are obliged to educate you. We assume you’ve done a modicum of reading and research. Do it. Get it done.

          mrw- Could you please supply some reference to support the contention that the Jews were expelled from England because of undermining of the currency.

          Start here: Abrahams, B. L. The Expulsion of the Jews from England in 1290 (1895).”

        • MRW says:
          November 22, 2009 at 2:46 am

          Actual pictorial evidence of the coin-clipping is in the book The Lost Science of Money” as well as the historical evidence, footnoted up the ying-yang.

          What’s the deal? Jews want to present themselves as Pollyannas? They weren’t. Neither were other groups. But for Jews to insist in the 21st C that somehow they were devoid of evil actions throughout history which resulted in their expulsion is a bunch of bullshit.

        • MRW says:
          November 22, 2009 at 2:48 am

          Sorry, obviously I effed-up the tagging thing.

        • tree says:
          November 22, 2009 at 2:51 am

          My reference was to make a point by analogy, which from your response I suspect that you understood but do not wish to acknowledge, and thus find it easier to claim I am being provocative. Thirty thousand or so is the number used by mainstream historians,as far as I am aware. But would you jump on someone who described the number of survivors as “a few thousand” as being an “anti-factual gloss” and then cite 100,000 as the proper number? Think about it.

        • tree says:
          November 22, 2009 at 2:53 am

          Not that it really matters here in cyberspace, chaos, but I’m a “she”.

        • VR says:
          November 22, 2009 at 3:33 am

          Tree, the number of the “survivors” are growing by the day. I calculate by 2020 there will be approximately 2 billion at the current rate of Holocaust industry nonsense. Those who use the Holocaust for shakedowns cheapen it more and more with every claim. In the meantime the real survivors which are few will have to make a choice between dog food or medication in Israel, ask the Israeli government where all the money went, some in my community which I have cared for would like to know (actually they know already, my statement was more of a rhetorical tool) –

          IN THE NAME OF THE VICTIMS

          THE FINAL INSULT

        • VR says:
          November 22, 2009 at 3:36 am

          To be more accurate, in Israel there have been some things done which has taken care of the survivors there. Only after organizing and protest. In the USA it is still a different story.

        • Koshiro says:
          November 22, 2009 at 4:59 am

          By the way: If I were a patriotic, gentile US citizen, all that “Jews need a place where they won’t be persecuted” stuff would really insult me. Jews have not only been able to live, persecution-free, in the US for as long as the nation existed, most of them even enjoy economic prosperity.

        • Citizen says:
          November 22, 2009 at 5:48 am

          carnas, ever hear of coin clipping? Were do you think the practice of indenting the side of coins came from?

        • wondering jew says:
          November 22, 2009 at 6:05 am

          mrw- There seem to be multiple sources and reasons given for the expulsion of the Jews from England. I guess we should be grateful that you accept the “undermining of the currency” reason rather than the “Jews love the blood of little dead gentiles in their matzas” reason.

          Also, I’m sorry for bothering people and asking them to cite their sources, I realize that they are too busy saying amen to the other Israel bashers to waste their time by cititing sources. Sorry.

        • wondering jew says:
          November 22, 2009 at 6:17 am

          Koshiro- It is true that the vast majority of Jews have lived persecution free in the United States, but Leo Frank for one did not. Although limitations on Jewish attendance at various schools and in various businesses and in various areas is for the most part lacking today, a serious study of American history would consider the phrase “persecution free” to be a gloss job rather than an in depth analysis.

          Zionism was not invented in the United States but rather in Eastern Europe. It was not invented recently but 120 years ago when the situation in Eastern Europe was rather dire. The need for a Jewish homeland or a state where Jews controlled immigration laws was proved in the 1930′s when there was a need for such a place and no such place existed. It is feasible that in the future no such place will be needed. Then again the vagaries of history are not predictable. The Jews of America are safe, but there are Jews in other countries that are not as safe.

        • Citizen says:
          November 22, 2009 at 6:22 am

          The expulsion was officially due to the practice of usury:
          link to en.wikipedia.org

          While there were many things legally forbidden to the medieval jew, some laws worked in their favor, some being they had a legal monopoly on usury, medicine, tax collection and rent collection, and they were allowed to roam
          freely without paying tolls as “property of the king.” Obviously these niche privileges prepared them for modern times.

        • potsherd says:
          November 22, 2009 at 9:52 am

          There were also some Arab tribes that made agreements with the Zionists at the outbreak of hostilities. And of course the Druze, who actively sided with them in exchange for toleration of their version of Islam, for which they had been subject to some persecution. They are counted in the Arab numbers.

        • Colin Murray says:
          November 22, 2009 at 11:54 am

          Do it on your own dime and time. Your Zionist compatriots in America are flushing my country down the toilet to subsidize your ethnic cleansing and colonization. Do you think Zionists have a right to use us, who have not attacked or offended you, this way?

        • MRW says:
          November 22, 2009 at 11:59 am

          WJ, you wrong that in the 1930’s when there was a need for such a place and no such place existed

          It was called Jewish Autonomous Oblast in the Far East of Russia. Look it up.

        • MRW says:
          November 22, 2009 at 12:19 pm

          Here’s the government portal: link to eao.ru
          Here are the photos of the capital: link to eao.ru

        • MRW says:
          November 22, 2009 at 12:34 pm

          carnas, re: your It’s about having one place in the world where Jews can be guaranteed they won’t be persecuted.

          I wrote it for WJ below. I’ll write it for you. The Jewish Autonomous Oblast or Region in Russia was there from 1928, but the Zionists who wanted Palestine never told anyone about it. Obviously, you’re completely ignorant of it.
          The government portal: link to eao.ru
          Photos of the capital (beautiful bldgs.): link to eao.ru

        • Shingo says:
          November 23, 2009 at 6:37 am

          “Great, MRW, now I’m just waiting for you to justify the holocaust, slavery, the destruction of the Native Americans, etc. etc. ”

          The destruction of Native Americans, as in the destruction of the indiginous population of Palestine? Do you enjoy soiliing yourself in public Carnas?

        • wondering jew says:
          November 23, 2009 at 11:14 pm

          Graetz’s version- Regarding the expulsion of the Jews from England: What follows is a synopsis of Heinrich Graetz’s version of the expulsion and its causes or lack of cause offered in Volume 3 of “History of the Jews” pages 641-645:

          “At the accession of Edward I they had prospects of a secure existence… They might have lived on in this lowly state, bowed down beneath the burden of the imposts and wearying themselves to satisfy through usury the insatiable demands of the royal treasury, had not a slight occurrence made them the object of the bitter hatred of the monks… In London there lived a Dominican named Robert de Redingge… he had studied the Hebrew language… to enable the monks to convert the Jews by means of their own writings. But instead of converting… he himself became converted. The Dominicans were enraged… and sought to wreak their vengeance upon the Jews. The queen mother Eleanor expelled the Jews from the town of Cambridge which belonged to her and fostered hostile feeling against them throughout the country.

          “Incited by the queen mother the House of Commons passed a statute which prohibited the Jews from usury. They were allowed to reside only in royal cities and boroughs. The House of Commons strictly enforced the wearing of the Jew-badge, determined its size and color (substituting yellow for white) and forbade all intercourse with Christians.

          “Counterfeit coins were in circulation in England; the coin of the country was often clipped. The charge was directed against the Jews, that they were the sole originators and circulators of the counterfeit coins. It was afterwards proved that many Christians had been guilty of counterfeiting the coin of the realm and that throughout the kingdom only 293 Jews had been convicted of the crime. Nevertheless over 10,000 Jews were made to suffer for this act. The Christians who were implicated, with the exception of three, were liberated on payment of a fine, the 293 Jews were hanged.

          “The enemies of the Jews did not tire of forging new charges against them. It was reported that the Jews of Northampton had crucified a Christian child. For this alleged crime many Jews in London were torn asunder by horses and their corpses hung on the gallows (April 2, 1279).

          “Whilst the queen mother, Eleanor, was exerting herself to inflame the king and the people against the Jews, the queen, also named Eleanor, bestowed the favor on them. She prayed the king confer the vacant chief rabbinate on Hagin Denlacres. The king granted her prayer and installed Hagin as chief rabbi (May 15, 1281).

          “When the king settled the chief rabbinate on Hagin, he had no thought of expelling the Jews. Gradually, however the fanatical party and his mother gained more influence over him and disturbed his clear perceptions. This party, probably the Dominicans, appeared before the newly elected pope, Honorius IV, lodging accusations against the Jews, that they encouraged the return of baptized Jews to Judaism, invited Christians on Sabbaths and festivals to the synagogue, made them bend the knee before the Torah and enticed them to adopt Jewish customs. The pope sent a missive to the archbishop and his legate, bidding them employ every means to put a stop to this improper conduct. On April 16, 1287, a church assembly was held in Exeter which renewed all the hateful canonical resolutions against the Jews. A fortnight later (May 2) the king ordered the arrest of all English Jews with their wives and children, an act for which no cause can be assigned. Nor did he release them until he received a large ransom. Three years later in 1290 Edward I, without the consent of Parliament, issued an edict of his own authority, that all the Jews of England were to be banished from the country. 16, 511 Jews of England left the country by the 9th of October.

        • Koshiro says:
          November 24, 2009 at 9:39 am

          > Koshiro- It is true that the vast majority of Jews have lived persecution
          > free
          > in the United States, but Leo Frank for one did not.

          Persecution is organized or at the very least tolerated by governments or equivalent institutions; it is large-scale and systematic. This – as far as Jews are concerned – never was a feature of US policy.
          Leo Frank was murdered by hateful criminals. There is unfortunately no place on this planet where anybody can be 100% safe from this – most certainly not Israel.

    • David Samel says:
      November 21, 2009 at 12:07 pm

      Carnas, your attack on Anna Baltzer is utterly disgraceful. First, what is written on the signs is not only true, it stands alone as a fully accurate picture of the core policy Israel enforces at the point of a gun. You, presumably Jewish, feel entitled to this overtly unfair privilege over people who were born in Israel/Palestine with the wrong ethnicity, because your ancestors were persecuted on a different continent before you were born. Then you accuse Anna Baltzer of being a spoiled child!

      No one can reasonably claim that Palestinians deserve their fate because they perpetrated or contributed to the Holocaust. Even if you believe the Dershowitz nonsense to the contrary, do you really think someone like Haithem el-Zabri should be punished for the supposed sins of his ancestors? You insist on treating Palestinians as less human, or at least as humans with less value to their lives and aspirations, than Jewish people. I think that Zionism is a form of racism, but acknowledge that there are many Zionists who are not racists, who disagree with my conclusion, and who think that Zionism can be reconciled with anti-racism. You, however, appear to be a Zionist who has no trouble with racism at all. You practically scream: “I’m entitled to be a racist, goddammit! Haven’t you ever heard of a liitle thing called the Holocaust? What about blood libel? Pogroms?”

      You know, I have to say, with all the complaints about Richard Witty on this site, I’ve never seen him say anything nearly as offensive as your comment.

    • Shmuel says:
      November 21, 2009 at 1:27 pm

      Thanks, carnas. You really sorted that one out for me. All Jewish opponents of Zionism are spoiled and ignorant (I’m assuming you don’t actually know Ms. Baltzer but were just trying to find an easy way to dismiss a positition you find disturbing), and all Jews (even Ms. Baltzer) are either pre or post-saved from Nazi extermination, thanks to the existence of the State of Israel.

      What I don’t quite understand is where Mr. El-Zabri fits into all of this.

      • carnas says:
        November 21, 2009 at 2:15 pm

        Mr. El-Zabri would have fit in just fine if his parents and grandparents hadn’t been so violently opposed to any Jewish settlement in Palestine.

        • Shmuel says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:21 pm

          And how do you know this? Is he a personal friend of yours? Regarding actual Palestinian resistance to Jewish attempts to appoint themselves overlords in part/all of Palestine, see tree’s “micro-Zionist” analogy, below.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:26 pm

          Actually, that’s not what the Palestinians opposed. What Palestinians opposed was the Nakba –and the Zionist belief that everyone who’s not a Jew must either submit to second-class status, or leave. What the Arab states opposed was the theft of land, up to and including a site that is holy in all three Abrahamic religions — in order to make one big Jewish gated community.

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:34 pm

          Doesn’t really explain Palestinian violence before 1948, does it, chaos? Too bad.

        • Shmuel says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:46 pm

          Zionist attempts – violent, diplomatic, commercial – to “take charge” of their “national home” (see “micro-Zionism, below) started long before 1948. Ahad Ha’am wrote about it in 1891.

        • VR says:
          November 21, 2009 at 4:18 pm

          Just as an aside for you Shmuel, this carnass character is the same one who argued with me that the military bases and other activity in the Negev did not bother anyone, that it was in the “middle of nowhere” – ostensibly denting the dispossession and suffering of the Bedouin. Apparently he knows nothing in regard to Israel trying to turn it into a desert “wonderland” of retreats and national parks either, driving the people (Bedouin) out of their homelands where they have existed for hundreds of years. Than again, I think you are already aware of what a blowhard this clueless or disingenuous individual is by your verbal exchange.

        • James Bradley says:
          November 21, 2009 at 4:24 pm

          The Zionists were persecuting the Palestinians well before 1948, kicking them off their land, bombing their markets, and killing Palestinians for harvesting their olives.

          In any case, the Palestinians weren’t stupid. They knew that these European Zionists were coming to their land to create their own country in which Palestinians would either be forced to leave or forced to live as a people with ZERO human rights. Who in their right mind would accept that? Of course the Palestinians resisted.

        • MRW says:
          November 21, 2009 at 6:58 pm

          the Zionist belief that everyone who’s not a Jew must either submit to second-class status, or leave

          Just like what Queen Isabella did to the Jews in 1492: become a Catholic or leave.

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 10:15 pm

          vr, you never managed to explain where a country the size of NJ is supposed to place its military bases. Besides the fact that most of the bases were not, in fact, constructed on Bedouin “homelands”, whatever the latter means (I’ll leave it to you to explain what exactly a homeland is for a nomadic people – does it include everything within 10k miles of their trade routes? 100k? Anything they decide on?).

        • VR says:
          November 21, 2009 at 10:56 pm

          I already explained it to you once pea brain (carnass), but you are more than welcome to check the archives – you are not worth a second effort. What was not taken for military purposes in the Negev was stolen and the Bedouin driven out by zoning for parks are desert retreats. It is not my fault if you are bereft of knowledge regarding the country you say you defend. That is about the size of both your hubris and defense, absolutely worthless.

        • VR says:
          November 22, 2009 at 12:27 am

          Or better yet carnass, we can send you to the places that have herded the Bedouin into (because contrary to your dumb ass statements, many owned title to land and lived in villages). You can stay there for 6 months, drink the polluted water, try to accomplish tasks without electricity and no outside communications. Than you can come back and tell us about how wonderful it is, and how Israel cares for the Bedouin.

        • Shingo says:
          November 23, 2009 at 6:49 am

          “Mr. El-Zabri would have fit in just fine if his parents and grandparents hadn’t been so violently opposed to any Jewish settlement in Palestine. ”

          Yeah, I’m sure they’d have lived wonderful lives in refugee camps, if only they have been more grcious about their land being taken from them.

          Hey Caranas, have you ever stopped to consider that there would be no Jewish state had Mr. El-Zabri’s grandparents not been driven from their land?

        • Shingo says:
          November 23, 2009 at 6:51 am

          “Doesn’t really explain Palestinian violence before 1948, does it, chaos? ”

          Yes it does, it’s called Zionist violence. The Irgun and Stern gangs were mudering Palestinians ten yeasr earlier.

    • Koshiro says:
      November 21, 2009 at 5:47 pm

      “I’m randomly roaming the internet. Because of my spiritual powers, I can converse with the dead and tell you that they wanted their fellow Jews to conquer, settle and colonize away – and if you dare object by saying, for example, that I can’t speak to the dead, you’re an anti-semite or a self-hating Jew.”

      If you have to rely on imagined thoughts of dead people to counter actual facts, that’s saying something about the strength of your arguments. And if you abuse Holocaust victims’ memory by allegedly having them support your colonizing, conquering, oppressing ways, that’s saying something about your moral integrity.

    • Julian says:
      November 23, 2009 at 9:27 am

      You would think having 99.95% of the region would be enough for the Arabs, but they want it all.

      • Shingo says:
        November 23, 2009 at 3:28 pm

        “You would think having 99.95% of the region would be enough for the Arabs, but they want it all. ”

        You would think that Zioncaine abusers would realise that 1.2 billion people who belong to one religion aren’t part of a monolithic collective, but are in fact, 1.2 billion individuals. Most Jews refuse to live in Israel, so you’d think that havign the disapora would be enough without stealing land from other people.

      • James Bradley says:
        November 23, 2009 at 3:33 pm

        “You would think having 99.95% of the region would be enough for the Arabs, but they want it all. ”

        You would think that Europeans owning 99.95% of the land in Europe, would be enough, but they don’t just want it all, they want to have another country in the Middle East as well.

  6. andrewfelluss says:
    November 21, 2009 at 11:47 am

    carnas, this idea of yours called Zionism (to create a Jewish State in Palestine) is a failed idea, and with good reason. You can’t just push people off their land and then try to negotiate a “final status” of injustice… The cost of pursuing this awful idea is more Palestinians lives and land, less Jewish safety… you can’t guaranteed freedom from persecution by persecuting other people. It just doesn’t add up buddy, sorry you’ve been brainwashed.

    • carnas says:
      November 21, 2009 at 11:54 am

      Here’s a fact you should remember: the land to the west of the Jordan currently has ~10 million residents. It had less than 10% of that in 1948. In other words, it could have easily been shared. Who didn’t want to share it? Here’s a clue: the side that rejected any attempt at partition.

      • Chaos4700 says:
        November 21, 2009 at 12:16 pm

        Which side had the Davidkas, machine guns, scads of surplus German military hardware and Plan Dalet?

        • yonira says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:04 pm

          What are you talking about Chaos? Did the the 5 invading Arab armies only have slingshots and bow and arrows?

          You really don’t have a clue about this do you? I applaud your activism, but get a clue, a real clue about the history. There is more to know than a quick google search.

          Maybe the near east department has a good history class you can take. Maybe the department isn’t hasn’t been swept up by the world wide Jewish conspiracy yet.

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:07 pm

          I’m assuming you think bouquets of love and harmony killed 4,000 Israeli soldiers and over 2,000 Israeli civilians in 1948.

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:18 pm

          That’s what happens when one people attempts to steal the land and homes of another. They don’t like it. They fight back.

        • James Bradley says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:22 pm

          Yonira the 5 Arab armies in numbers did not equal even HALF the single Israeli army. Nor did they have the equipment of the vastly larger Israeli army.

          Second, the Israelis were already in the process of ethnically cleansing the Palestinians before a single Arab soldier entered Palestine.

          Its time you learn your history.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 2:25 pm

          I’m confused. So you guys are denying that Haganah ever existed? How about Irgun?

        • yonira says:
          November 21, 2009 at 3:08 pm

          You are wrong James, but if you were right, whose fault is that, Israels? Why would they invade if they knew they’d get destroyed? Is this the Arab mentality in war, just get your asses handed to you left and right? Let Allah fight your wars?

        • James Bradley says:
          November 21, 2009 at 4:31 pm

          Uhm, these are the facts Yonira, go read any history book even an Israeli one.

          The single Jewish Zionist army outnumbered the 5 Arab armies at a rate of almost 3:1 by the end of the war, and at a rate of 2:1 throughout the majority of the fighting. This does not take into consideration the vastly superior equipment of the Haganah and their terrorist groups (the Stern, and Irgun).

          Yes, the Arab armies were defeated, what does that have to do with anything? The simple fact remains that Israel was the aggressor, ethnically cleansed hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, and took even more land than the unfair partition allowed for.

          Also, its time you began to stop refraining from using racist reasoning to advance your points. “Arab mentality is to get their asses handed to you lef and right?” seriously Yonira? Really? I know racism and Zionism go hand in hand, but cmon, at least spare us the crap, your not dealing with people who are accustomed to your twisted logic and rewriting of history.

        • yonira says:
          November 21, 2009 at 4:58 pm

          Israel was the aggressor in 48? what history books are you reading?

          If the Arab armies were so out numbered why did they go to war in 48? 67, 73, 82, 91, 06, 08-09?

        • tree says:
          November 21, 2009 at 5:38 pm

          Israeli history books, yonira. The pre-state of Israel had already expelled over 350,000 Palestinians before May 15th, 1948, when the Arab armies entered what was once Mandate Palestine. Many of those expelled were from areas assigned to the Arab state in the UN partition plan. The vast majority of the fighting with the foreign Arab armies occurred on territory that had been allotted to the Arab State by the partition plan, not in the area assigned to Israel. Eighty percent of the Israeli Jewish fatalities occurred during what were Israeli OFFENSIVE battles, not defensive ones. By these definitions, Israel was the aggressor.

          Israel had 6,000 casualties during the war. The only estimates I have found for Palestinian/Arab casualties are Israeli ones, and the corresponding death toll estimates are 35,000. They are probably underestimates, as they are referred to as Arab army deaths and don’t specifically refer to how many Palestinian civilians were killed,and we know that most Israeli actions included attacks on civilian Palestinian areas.

          The Arab armies went to war in ’48 because of the worsening refugee problem that pre-state Israel was causing. They went to war in 1967 because they were attacked by Israel, and in 1973 they were attempting to regain lost territory that Israel refused to return by negotiation. The rest were wars planned by Israel. And you neglected to mention 1956 and 1978. For some reason, Zionists like to ignore 1956 entirely. Too hard to pretend it was other than a planned aggression, I suspect.

        • James Bradley says:
          November 21, 2009 at 6:24 pm

          Israel began the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in 1947, well before any Arab army made it to Palestine. The Arab masses demanded that their governments do something to remedy the situation, and thus the Arabs sent a token rag tag army as a way of calming down the angry public who were enraged about the ethnic cleansing going on in Palestine at the hands of the European Zionists.

          Also just to give you a frame of reference. I’ll list the contributions of each Arab Army.

          Egypt: 10,000 initially; 20,000 by end of war
          Iraq: 8,000 initially; 10,000 by end of war.
          Syria: 2,500
          Lebanon: 1,000
          Saudi Arabia: 800.

          Grand total by end of war: 34,300.

          Meanwhile the Israelis had mobilized 115,000 soldiers by the end of the war.

          Just read the Israeli Zionist historian Benny Morris’s account of what happened. This is not even disputed anymore.

          Its time for you to grow up and accept the facts for what they are.

          If you really care about peace, you would advocate on behalf of Human rights for everyone and not just for your own ethnic group. Believe it or not, Americans won’t be willing to subsidize the ethnic cleansing of Palestine forever.

        • MRW says:
          November 21, 2009 at 7:12 pm

          What books, yonira? Read Khirbet Khizeh by S. Yizhar. The book was published in 1949. It is contemporaneous. He was there. He fought for Israel and wrote the truth of it. It was a sensation at the time. But, perhaps, you dont read . . .

        • wondering jew says:
          November 22, 2009 at 1:29 am

          James Bradley -What ethnic cleansing was done in 1947?

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 22, 2009 at 1:46 am

          Benny Morris and Ilan Pappe, among others, have documented that extensively WJ.

        • tree says:
          November 22, 2009 at 3:01 am

          What ethnic cleansing was done in 1947?

          I was going to post a passage from Pappe’s “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine” about the Haganah’s actions, under the direction of Ben Gurion, in early through mid December 1947 aimed at ethnic cleansing in Haifa, Deir Ayyub, Beit Affa, and Khisas, but its really too long to quote under fair use practices. I’d suggest you read the book. Check pages 50-61.

      • tree says:
        November 21, 2009 at 12:23 pm

        carnas,

        Send me your address. I’m coming over to “share” your house. If you object in any way, (or if I just suspect that you are objecting in any way) I’ll have to forcibly remove you from your house and prevent you from ever returning. If only you’d share, everything will be fine, but of course you’ll have to accept that I’m in charge of all household decisions. And I get all the bedrooms and the kitchen, and will need to control the hallways to ensure my security. Welcome to micro-Zionism. How could you object?

        If Israel had so much room in 1948, then why didn’t the state allow the Palestinian refugees to return to their homes, instead of issuing shoot to kill orders at the border? According to the IDF archives, the state was well aware that over 90% of those attempting to return were merely trying to return to their own homes and land. You can’t ethnically cleanse 3/4 of a million people, forcibly prevent their return, and then delude yourself that you really only wanted to “share”. Oh wait, you can delude yourself, can’t you? Zionism means never having to say you are sorry.

      • MRW says:
        November 21, 2009 at 7:03 pm

        Because they owned the land, and no one has to share land with squatters.

        You might ask that question of present day Israel.

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 9:58 pm

          No, they didn’t own “the land”. There was no state, and in terms of private ownership, they owned a small fraction of it. Do I have rights over the forest that’s across from my house? Don’t think so, try again.

        • James Bradley says:
          November 21, 2009 at 10:17 pm

          Uhm yes they did own the land.

          In any case, are you saying its “O.K” for me today, right now, to go into a foreign land and begin building the foundations of my own state, just because someone does not own the deed to a “forest.”

          You know what, I dare you to go to some unclaimed part of Mozambique and begin constructing your own state their right now. See how your pathetic defense would hold up there.

          Finally, the Zionists never owned more than 5% of what is historic Palestine. The rest of the land was stolen through conquest.

          Learn your history.

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 10:26 pm

          “The rest of the land was stolen through conquest.”
          If you start a war and lose the land, it’s not stolen. It’s won fair and square. And you don’t get to cry foul only after you discover your violence doesn’t work.

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 10:40 pm

          The Ottoman Empire was most definitely a state.

          In fact, when it helps them steal more land, the Israelis still apply Ottoman law in the territories.

          And I’m sure carnas will gladly admit that it is “fair and square” when all the Jews are driven into the sea by the invading Ba’ahis, because force is the only thing that matters in his worldview.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 11:08 pm

          “If you start a war and lose the land, it’s not stolen. It’s won fair and square.”

          Remember that you said that, carnas. You will come to regret it, I predict, in the near future.

        • DisgustedOfTunbridgeWells says:
          November 21, 2009 at 11:08 pm

          Two statements – “There was no state” and “If you start a war and lose the land, it’s not stolen.”

          Legitimate authority: Only duly constituted public authorities may wage war (ie – states).

          Can you see the problem with your two, directly contradictory claims ?

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 11:34 pm

          Wow, chaos, you’re so scary.
          Here’s my prediction: everyone here will continue blabbering about the issue as if they’re experts (not) and as if their opinions matter to anyone but themselves (not, again). Oh, and a peace deal between Israel and Syria will happen long before any settlement with the Palestinians. When they manage to decide who their leaders are, and these don’t include religious fanatics who are only willing to settle on short-term ceasefires, maybe a deal can be reached. I’m not holding my breath.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 11:52 pm

          There’s not going to be any peace between Israel and Syria as long as Israel believes it can take land and send bombers into Syria whenever it strikes their fancy. What parallel universe are you living in, carnas? I love it how even when Palestinians agree to cease fires you still condemn them. You really do hate Palestinians no matter what they do.

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 11:58 pm

          Talk about a parallel universe:
          “In the case of Dair Alzour, the UN watchdog has more or less ruled out Syria’s theory that the uranium came from the Israeli bombs that destroyed the building in September 2007.
          And the latest report shows that inspectors are similarly sceptical of Syria’s explanation about the provenance of the uranium at the MNSR.
          Syria was not providing the necessary cooperation, nor the information or access that would enable the IAEA to confirm Syria’s statements regarding the non-nuclear nature of the destroyed building on the Dair Alzour site, the report said.”
          “Syria has continued to obstruct a U.N. investigation into activities once carried out at a suspected nuclear reactor site destroyed by Israel two years ago, the International Atomic Energy Agency stated in a report issued today.”
          link to google.com
          link to globalsecuritynewswire.org

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 22, 2009 at 12:08 am

          And? You haven’t exactly contradicted what I said about Israelis violating Syrian airspace. If undeclared nuclear capacity in even raw amounts is reason enough, Israel should have been leveled five times over now for its illicit nuclear arsenal. Double standard much?

        • James Bradley says:
          November 22, 2009 at 1:37 am

          Even if the war was started by the Palestinians, which it wasn’t. After all hundreds of thousands of Palestinians had been ethnically cleansed from Palestine well before any Arab soldiers entered the conflict.

          In any case Israel would still not be allowed to conquer their land and ethnically cleanse them under international law. International law states that refugees must be allowed to return after the conflict has died down. Israel has yet to comply.

          But then again Israel plays by different rules and standards right?

        • Citizen says:
          November 22, 2009 at 7:40 am

          Actually, carnas, Israel obtained its land by the use of terrorism, of which at least one great Jewish mind said such roots will in the end be Israel’s undoing:
          link to deiryassin.org

        • Shingo says:
          November 23, 2009 at 4:34 pm

          “If you start a war and lose the land, it’s not stolen. It’s won fair and square.”

          Except that Israel were stealing the land before the war started.

          And by your logic, the land of Israel is up for grabs to anyone who can take it from Israel. In which case, why should anyone recognize Israel?

          Would that be fair and square?

        • Shingo says:
          November 23, 2009 at 4:38 pm

          “Syria was not providing the necessary cooperation, nor the information or access that would enable the IAEA to confirm Syria’s statements regarding the non-nuclear nature of the destroyed building on the Dair Alzour site, the report said.””

          Israel has never provided the necessary cooperation, nor the information or access that would enable the IAEA to confirm Israel’s statements regarding the non-nuclear nature of the Dimona sight either.

          Should Syria be sending the bombers now or later?

      • Shingo says:
        November 23, 2009 at 6:57 am

        “Here’s a clue: the side that rejected any attempt at partition. ”

        I take it you are referring to Ben Gurion who 1938 said that “after we build up a strong force following the establishment of the state – we will abolish the partition of the country and we will expand to the whole Land of Israel.”

    • tree says:
      November 21, 2009 at 12:27 pm

      …you can’t guaranteed freedom from persecution by persecuting other people

      ….bears repeating. Its amazing how hard it is for some to understand such a basic concept.

  7. andrewfelluss says:
    November 21, 2009 at 12:48 pm

    tree, i like the micro-zionism analogy.. Guess Who’s coming to dinner: Benjamin Yahoo!
    sorry for the typo ‘guarantee’..
    it’s amazing how people will cherrypick the parts of Israel they like (or would like to see), without looking at the big picture: Continuous Transfer.

  8. bob says:
    November 21, 2009 at 3:10 pm

    I know its not constructive, but Anna Baltzer is both intelligent and a knock out.

    That is all.

  9. es1982 says:
    November 21, 2009 at 4:27 pm

    Where was Haithem El-Zabri born? If he’s from Palestine, I assume he was born in the West Bank, Gaza or East Jerusalem, since he isn’t over 60.

  10. Oscar says:
    November 21, 2009 at 5:07 pm

    Bob, well done. I think you’ve redirected the testosterone in this heated thread toward Anna’s irresistible persona. If the MSM ever gets its act together and provides true balance on the I/P scenario, Anna will be the gamechanger.

    Once again, kudos to The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart for breaking the barrier with his recent interview with Anna and Mustafa Barghouti:
    http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-october-28-2009/exclusive—anna-baltzer—mustafa-barghouti-extended-interview-pt–1

    • yonira says:
      November 21, 2009 at 7:01 pm

      I was proud of both of them in their interview. Palestine needs people like them to help their people. The plan of ‘attack’ over the last 60 years hasn’t exactly worked for them.

      • James Bradley says:
        November 21, 2009 at 10:12 pm

        You mean the plan of resistance hasn’t worked for them? Also how has Israeli violence worked towards achieving its ends? Violence that is on a scale thousands of times greater than anything the Palestinians have ever achieved. Its like blaming the demise of the Native Americans on their inability to refrain from violence while their lands and people were being killed.

        Finally, why can’t you understand that virtually all Palestinian (including Hamas) have agreed to the 67 borders.

        The only belligerent party in this conflict is Israel. Its time you stopped beating around the bush and accept that.

        • carnas says:
          November 21, 2009 at 10:31 pm

          “all Palestinian (including Hamas) have agreed to the 67 borders. ”
          There’s a reason they’re only willing to agree to a hudna. “We won’t kill you or seek your destruction for 10 years, but after that, everything’s fair”. Sounds like such a great deal.

        • potsherd says:
          November 21, 2009 at 10:43 pm

          May the side with the most violence win, “fair and square.” The Carnas Doctrine.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 21, 2009 at 11:07 pm

          Even if that were true, carnas — and it’s not — it’s better than Israel’s attitude: “Oh, well, we said we were going to have a cease fire, but politics demands that we kill some Palestinians to whip up fear and xenophobia. Let’s go after these guys digging that hole over there, and them move on to hospitals, schools and apartment buildings.”

        • James Bradley says:
          November 22, 2009 at 1:26 am

          No the full peace that Hamas accepted based on the 1967 borders is NOT a “hudna” Carnas. Its a FULL peace in which Hamas, the most extreme of the mainstream Palestinian groups is willing to accept a solution in which the Palestinians be given LESS than 20% of their historic homeland.

          Sorry, Carnas but your hasbara bullshit does not work here.

          Also do not forget that Hamas created a new Charter, in which the call for the destruction of Israel was removed.

          Oh and did you know that Hamas renounced suicide bombing years ago?

          link to guardian.co.uk

          Meanwhile, Israels Likud party has a charter which explicitly states that NO Palestinian state will be created West of the Jordan River.

          The Palestinians have compromised, when will Israel?

        • Shingo says:
          November 23, 2009 at 6:08 am

          “There’s a reason they’re only willing to agree to a hudna. ”

          That a boy Carnas. Why let facts stand in the way of a good lie?

          Hamas drops call for destruction of Israel from manifesto
          link to guardian.co.uk

  11. MRW says:
    November 21, 2009 at 7:31 pm

    Maybe it’s time we all talked about Zionist Anti-Gentilism.

  12. Pingback: Jews and Palestinians don’t have the same rights, deal with it | Antony Loewenstein

  13. MRW says:
    November 21, 2009 at 8:51 pm

    yonira, carnas, and the rest of you re-writers of history: I’m listening to David Goldfarb on NPR right now talking about the complete emancipation of Jews in Europe beginning at the end of the 18th C. Began during the period of the French Revolution. His book is called Emancipation.

  14. robin says:
    November 22, 2009 at 2:31 am

    Virginia Tilley has a good article in electronic intifada about the two-state solution and unilateral independence: link to electronicintifada.net

    I think a good way for Americans to understand the two-state proposal would be like this: it is the “separate but equal” doctrine applied to governments.

    A Palestinian state is better than nothing, just like for Black Americans a black-only school would have been better than no school at all. But given the massive power imbalances in both situations, there is no way separation can provide anything close to equality. Rather, what it does is codify and facilitate discrimination.

    Something I would like to see more of in this blog is the views of Palestinian refugees in the diaspora and Palestinian citizens of Israel. I would like to know how they feel about a lot of things really, but especially whether the leadership in Ramallah (or Gaza) represents them, and how they view the various “solution” proposals. It’s my sense that “what the Palestinians want” is sort of a complicated matter now, and I would like to get a better sense of it. Given that the Abbas regime is unelected and largely disgraced, I don’t know that we can consider them as representative anymore.

    • MRW says:
      November 22, 2009 at 2:56 am

      Robin,
      Something I would like to see more of in this blog is the views of Palestinian refugees in the diaspora and Palestinian citizens of Israel.

      Why would they bother? They read this blog and click to another. Every once in a while, someone comments from this point of view, acknowledges who is telling the truth, and then leaves. Because we are beset here with the Zionist anti-Gentilism that is rife otherwise.

  15. MRW says:
    November 22, 2009 at 2:59 am

    potsherd,

    The standard coin was approx 135 grains of gold or a double of it (265-270 grains). The coin-clipping was the reason for the King of England banning Jews for 400 years. The usury against his subjects didn’t bother him; the loss to his royal treasury did.

    • Citizen says:
      November 22, 2009 at 7:03 am

      Yes, the coin clipping always bothered the King. The King took advantage of the fact
      his Jewish subjects could charge interest–even the King’s courts enforced this, while simultaneously the few Gentile bankers could only get back their principle via those courts. When the King grew overly dependent on his Jews, overly in debt, the King would suddenly declare usury a sin, in accordance with original papal decrees, and stir up the peasants and serfs against the Jews whom the masses only experienced
      as harsh servants of the King; old fables of christ-killer and baby blood draining would be thrown in the hopper–then the King grabbed everything from his Jewish creditors
      and the peasants and serfs got to blow off some anti-semitic steam, followed by their return to the yoke. This medieval pattern turned up again in the 20th Century
      devoid of strong kings; it may well turn up again, old wine in new bottles, perhaps here?

  16. Richard Witty says:
    November 22, 2009 at 9:58 am

    Anna Balzer:

    “His land” – Is she referring to a specific piece of land that he specifically has a specific evidenced title claim to, or is it only rhetorical?

    Hatham El-Zabri – Is he referrint to a specific piece of land that he specificallyhas a specific evidenced title claim to, or is it only rhetorical?

    Again, my wife can travel to Hungary peaceably, but she cannot claim land that her family owned prior to historical events in the 30′s and 40′s. She cannot even enter a claim to.

    She does have the right to apply for Hungarian citizenship now, but was prohibited from that until 10 years ago.

    • Citizen says:
      November 22, 2009 at 10:48 am

      Her land: She, born in Texas, nor her ancestors, have to prove any sort of land title at all in any land control by Israel; she gets to move there with top civil rights. “Her land” is far more than rhetorical since it is based on force of arms (with a fig leaf of
      mythical rhetoric going back to the words in the Torah). His land: Ah, what’s the right of possession for generations anyway?

      • Richard Witty says:
        November 22, 2009 at 11:28 am

        Title claims are specific and relative.

        Rhetoric MISREPRESENTS, as clever and suggestive as it is.

        • Cliff says:
          November 22, 2009 at 3:18 pm

          Almost ALL of Israel is built on Palestinian land you yuppie douche.

        • Richard Witty says:
          November 22, 2009 at 3:53 pm

          The basis of all collective punishment “most of them are …..”

        • tree says:
          November 22, 2009 at 4:31 pm

          You do realize, Richard, that your claim that Israel is the Jewish homeland is merely rhetoric. Rhetoric that misrepresents. There are only a few Jews who have ever held title claims to any portion of the land in present day Israel. Or is this just another bright, shiny example of your double standards?

        • Richard Witty says:
          November 22, 2009 at 5:21 pm

          Ironically, its also true that only a small minority of Palestinians had perfected title in the land that is contested.

          That is an important, but not controlling, consideration.

          There is a large difference in title standards between what we assume is “ours”, and the right of most fellahin Palestinians, which was by residence not contested by external landowners.

          The majority of land in geographic Israel was genuinely unoccupied in 1948, with no Israeli or Palestinian claiming even residence rights. Some Bedouin claimed right of passage in some parts of the Negev.

          So, to sort it out fairly and legally by modern standards of title, requires recognition of relative title that fellahin held (leasehold rights, or usufructury if no written agreement) and compensation, and recognition of any overtly expelled persons’ rights.

          The dilemma for activists, is that the likely degree of compensation that should be transferred is not as gross as asserted.

          Certainly, not as gross as Balzer’s slogan, assuming that the relationship was generally descriptive.

          If she is supporting national owership rights as the rhetoric, that does not have legal standing in color-blind courts.

          Its unknown if she is speaking of a specific case, or it was just a catchy phrase.

        • tree says:
          November 22, 2009 at 7:34 pm

          This is incorrect: [quelle surprise!]

          The majority of land in geographic Israel was genuinely unoccupied in 1948, with no Israeli or Palestinian claiming even residence rights.

          Richard, as usual, you really don’t know what you are talking about, and your reference to “perfected title” is merely a sop to excuse your bias, as you know that Israel has purposefully made it extremely difficult for Palestinians to have”perfected”, or unchallenged, title, due to discriminatory and destructive actions by the State of Israel. Most Palestinians who fled or were expelled had land rights, either direct ownership rights or usufructuary rights. and these were in fact acknowledged in 1949 by the JNF.

          Israel within the greenline is comprised of roughly 5.5 million acres, or 22 million dunums (4 dunums =1 acre). According to the JNF, in a study of Jewish Israeli villages in 1949:

          Of the entire area of the State of Israel only about 300,000- 400,000 dunams – apart from the desolate rocky area of the southern Negev, at present quite unfit for cultivation – are State Domain which the Israel Government took over from the Mandatory regime. The J.N.F. and private Jewish owners possess under two million dunams. Almost all the rest belongs at law to Arab owners, many of whom have left the country. The fate of these Arabs will be settled when the terms of the peace treaties between Israel and her Arab neighbours are finally drawn up. The J.N.F., however, cannot wait until then to obtain the land it requires for its pressing needs. It is, therefore, acquiring part of the land abandoned by the Arab owners, through the Government of Israel, the sovereign authority in Israel.

          Whatever the ultimate fate of the Arabs concerned, it is manifest that their legal right to their land and property in Israel, or to the monetary value of them, will not be waived, nor do the Jews wish to ignore them.

          Legal conquest of territory is a powerful factor in determining the frontiers and the sovereignty of a state. But conquest by force of arms cannot, in law or in ethics, abrogate the rights of the legal owner to his personal property. The J.N.F., therefore, will pay for the lands it takes over, at a fixed and fair price. The Government will receive the money and in due time will make compensation to the Arabs.

          link to palestine-encyclopedia.com

          Granted, their assurances that Arab property rights will be respected is bull—-, but even the JNF admitted that the majority of land within Israel was owned by private Palestinian owners, and did not refer to any Palestinian “national” rights to property but to individual rights of ownership. To now pretend that Palestinians had no individual ownership rights is equivalent to Nakba denial.

          According to “A Survey of Palestine”, conducted by the British Mandate authorities in 1946, figures from April 1943 showed that non-Jewish Palestinians owned 24.5 million dunums of land and Jews owned 1.5 million dunums. British estimates of State land put it at somewhere between 600,000 and 900,000 dunums, or less than 4% of the total area of Mandate Palestine. Britain also acknowledged that the Bedouins were the owners of much of the land of the Negev. (source: same link as above)

          For anyone interested in reading the original “Survey of Palestine” it is available here: link to palestineremembered.com

    • tree says:
      November 22, 2009 at 4:36 pm

      She does have the right to apply for Hungarian citizenship now, but was prohibited from that until 10 years ago.

      So she has more rights in Hungary that you are willing to accept for Palestinian refugees from Israel. She was not born in Hungary, yet she has a right to return there as a full citizen, because her parents were forced to leave there. Tell us again why what the Palestinians are asking for is out of bounds for them, but acceptable for your wife.

      • Richard Witty says:
        November 22, 2009 at 5:23 pm

        I though the Hungarian offer was absurd. But, yes you are right. She does have more rights to return to Hungary, than a Palestinian that was alive and resident of Israel in 1948 even, or of many from East Jerusalem in 1967.

        • tree says:
          November 22, 2009 at 7:40 pm

          And she has more rights to return to Hungary than you are willing to accord the descendants of those Palestinians who were never afforded the right to return during their lifetime, even though she too is “merely” as descendant of someone who was denied their rights of citizenship.

        • Chaos4700 says:
          November 22, 2009 at 7:52 pm

          You didn’t tell us why your wife is so very much more privileged than any Palestinian, Witty. Presuming, of course, that you do believe that, since you didn’t really bat an eyelash when tree pointed that out.

  17. VR says:
    November 22, 2009 at 12:33 pm

    No Witty, title claims are not relevant in Israel. The only claims that are relative is what the reigning power decides – in the “only democracy in the Middle East.” When there is no recognition of legal right of return the title issues are void, and specifically when there is a right of perpetual “return” (which is an oxymoron regarding Zionist claims) embraced by reigning party. All that remains is that “might makes right,” so one may feign legality all they like but in this context in Israel, it is complete bullshit.

    Note, that even those properties that were supposed to be held in perpetuity for the Palestinians (who were refused the right of return) are sold to Zionists, with a bogus proviso of the “possibility” of claim when a mythical settlement is acquired. It is a joke of epic proportions (listen to this official ass from Israel equivocate and try to twist from any legal requirement in regard to Palestinian property “held for them”) -

    DEALING IN STOLEN PROPERTY

    This is just one of a myriad of ways the theft continues, official documents and title, the proof of ownership means nothing in Israel – if you are a Palestinian.

  18. Richard Witty says:
    November 22, 2009 at 5:27 pm

    Israel does adjudicate some contested title claims, and many in Palestinians’ favor. (None from those that left, and none of descendants of those that left, per the early 1950′s laws.)

    I agree with you that there is currently an institutionalization of theft, particularly in expanding settlements.

    And, I hope that the similar pattern in the Arab world, including within the jurisdiction of Palestine are reformed as well.

    • Chaos4700 says:
      November 22, 2009 at 8:00 pm

      How many, Witty? Expressed in either raw number, or percent. How many is “many?”

      I love it how the worst criticism you ever, ever manage about Israel is “well somebody’s doing something just as bad or worse.”

      • tree says:
        November 22, 2009 at 8:22 pm

        Well, there are the villagers of Biram and Ikrit (Palestinian citizens of Israel), who had their ownership rights “adjudicated” by the Israeli Supreme Court back in the 50′s and won. Of course, they still haven’t been allowed to return to their land, but, hey, its only been 50-odd years since the decision. You can’t rush these things, you know.

        I’m sure if we all just speak nicely and sing “kumbaya” that Israel will give them their land back in the next 20 or 40 years, unless of course the original villagers have the bad taste to up and die beforehand, because we all know that once the original owners die, their immediate heirs are entitled to bubkis. (Unless of course the heirs are Jewish, in which case no proof of actual inheritance is necessary, and rights remain in effect for 2000 years or more.)

  19. The Hasbara Buster says:
    November 22, 2009 at 8:34 pm

    Hahaha… excellent satire, Tree.

    Let’s also not forget about other villages in Israel, like Ein Hod, whose original inhabitants are “present absentees” (i.e., Israeli citizens who are not allowed to return to the houses from which they’re “absent,” presumably because their titles are “imperfect”). This village was turned into an artists’ colony, where Jewish painters, sculptors and musicians debate the intricacies of form and content as they sip coffee in a posh bar that once happened to be a mosque.

  20. MRW says:
    November 23, 2009 at 12:36 am

    Witty. When will it ever dawn on you to research what you present as facts:

    Witty: Ironically, its also true that only a small minority of Palestinians had perfected title in the land that is contested…..The majority of land in geographic Israel was genuinely unoccupied in 1948, with no Israeli or Palestinian claiming even residence rights. Some Bedouin claimed right of passage in some parts of the Negev. Bullshit.

    ISRAELI MAP SAYS WEST BANK POSTS SIT ON ARAB LAND
    By STEVEN ERLANGER
    Published: November 21, 2006

    Photos: ”This is mine, and that is yours,” says Mr. Abdellatif, with his wife.; The Ayelet Hashachar synagogue in Givat Zeev, an Israeli settlement on the West Bank, was built on land claimed by Rabah Abdellatif, a resident of Al Jib, visible in the distance. (Photographs by Rina Castelnuovo for The New York Times)(pg. A8); About 86 percent of this Israeli settlement, Maale Adumim, sits on privately held Palestinian property, according to government data. (Photo by Rina Castelnuovo for The New York Times)(pg. A1)

    Chart/Map: ”Settlements on Privately Owned Palestinian Land”
    An analysis of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, using Israeli government data, found that 15,000 acres, or 39 percent of the developed area of the settlements, is privately owned by Palestinians.

    Extent of developed area of settlement: 3,174 acres

    Part of settlement that is on privately owned Palestinian land: 2,741 acres

    Maps of the West Bank highlighting the following areas:
    Ariel: 1,795 –35%
    Itamar: 1,195 — 44%
    Ofra: 1,167 — 93%
    Maale Adumim: 3,174 acres — 86% on private land
    Gush Etzion: 107 — 11%
    ===================
    An Israeli advocacy group, using maps and figures leaked from inside the government, says that 39 percent of the land held by Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank is privately owned by Palestinians.

    Israel has long asserted that it fully respects Palestinian private property in the West Bank and only takes land there legally or, for security reasons, temporarily.

    If big sections of those settlements are indeed privately held Palestinian land, that is bound to create embarrassment for Israel and further complicate the already distant prospect of a negotiated peace. The data indicate that 40 percent of the land that Israel plans to keep in any future deal with the Palestinians is private.

    The new claims regarding Palestinian property are said to come from the 2004 database of the Civil Administration, which controls the civilian aspects of Israel’s presence in the West Bank. Peace Now, an Israeli group that advocates Palestinian self-determination in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, plans to publish the information on Tuesday. An advance copy was made available to The New York Times.

    Read the rest here: link to query.nytimes.com

  21. MRW says:
    November 23, 2009 at 12:45 am

    A better NYT link with maps and pictures.
    link to nytimes.com