Israel

[kuzadd]

The Ottoman Empire lost ownership and control over the lands of the Middle East in 1919 to Britain and France as the spoils of war. The Middle East was partitioned into French and British protectorates from 1919 to 1949. Following WW-II, the British turned over their protectorate to the United Nations for a resolution of valid land claims by both the Arabs and Jews. It is not possible to steal something from the Palestinians that they did did not own for over 500 years of Ottoman and British ownership and rule.

The british turned over there 'protecterate'??

You do mean someone elses country, filled with citizens of that country, right?

protectorate: is a political entity (a sovereign state or less developed native polity, such as a tribal chiefstainship or feudal princely state) that formally agrees by treaty to enter into an unequal relationship with another, stronger state, called the protector, which engages to protect it (diplomatically or, if needed, militarily) against third parties, in exchange for which the protectorate usually accepts specified obligations, which may vary greatly, depending on the real nature of their relationship.

So Britian failed under international law, like the US has in Iraq, to protect it's protectorate.

Rich!

[WestViking]

The Ottoman Empire lost ownership and control over the lands of the Middle East in 1919 to Britain and France as the spoils of war. The Middle East was partitioned into French and British protectorates from 1919 to 1949. Following WW-II, the British turned over their protectorate to the United Nations for a resolution of valid land claims by both the Arabs and Jews. It is not possible to steal something from the Palestinians that they did did not own for over 500 years of Ottoman and British ownership and rule.

The british turned over there 'protecterate'??

You do mean someone elses country, filled with citizens of that country, right?

protectorate: is a political entity (a sovereign state or less developed native polity, such as a tribal chiefstainship or feudal princely state) that formally agrees by treaty to enter into an unequal relationship with another, stronger state, called the protector, which engages to protect it (diplomatically or, if needed, militarily) against third parties, in exchange for which the protectorate usually accepts specified obligations, which may vary greatly, depending on the real nature of their relationship.

So Britian failed under international law, like the US has in Iraq, to protect it's protectorate.

Rich!

On the contrary, Britain turned over its protectorate to the United Nations so that the interests of both Arabs and Jews could be properly dealt with by the world body. The UN in turn created both Israeli and Palestinian nations within the old protectorate. Israel accepted the UN plan; the Arab states refused to accept the UN plan for Palestine, declaring that they would destroy Israel instead. The Arabs have been trying to do so ever since.

[jbg]

The british turned over there 'protecterate'??

You do mean someone elses country, filled with citizens of that country, right?

protectorate: is a political entity (a sovereign state or less developed native polity, such as a tribal chiefstainship or feudal princely state) that formally agrees by treaty to enter into an unequal relationship with another, stronger state, called the protector, which engages to protect it (diplomatically or, if needed, militarily) against third parties, in exchange for which the protectorate usually accepts specified obligations, which may vary greatly, depending on the real nature of their relationship.

So Britian failed under international law, like the US has in Iraq, to protect it's protectorate.

Rich!

Since there was no independent nation of Palestine, nor any people that identified themselves as "Palestinian" are you saying that the only people entitled to "protection" were worshipers of Allah, or thugs in the nature of Mohamed?

Apparently the Muslims are the world's victims. It's everyone else's fault that they live in disorderly hovels of countries, almost all anarchic, chaotic dictatorships. I guess it's everyone else's fault that the Ottomans picked the wrong side in WW I, as did the Arabs in WW II.

[kuzadd]

The british turned over there 'protecterate'??

You do mean someone elses country, filled with citizens of that country, right?

protectorate: is a political entity (a sovereign state or less developed native polity, such as a tribal chiefstainship or feudal princely state) that formally agrees by treaty to enter into an unequal relationship with another, stronger state, called the protector, which engages to protect it (diplomatically or, if needed, militarily) against third parties, in exchange for which the protectorate usually accepts specified obligations, which may vary greatly, depending on the real nature of their relationship.

So Britian failed under international law, like the US has in Iraq, to protect it's protectorate.

Rich!

Since there was no independent nation of Palestine, nor any people that identified themselves as "Palestinian" are you saying that the only people entitled to "protection" were worshipers of Allah, or thugs in the nature of Mohamed?

Yes, there was a nation, a sovereign nation, and that is a fact and that is that!

Go back at look at the UN language of the time, it is quite clear there was a Palestine, filled with it's own citizens, Palestinians.

Fact!

[Higgly]

Well, on third thought, why abandon the field to my lessers just because they behave like thugs?

West Viking dwells, as so many of Israel's supporters do, on the victim mythology Israel likes to spread so thickly. Note how West Viking just simply refers to "The Arabs". Apparently you know so little about the Middle East, you can't even distinguish between them. You probably think Iran is full of Arabs. Then there are the vague statements about the Palestinians never having owned anything. You apparently haven't even bothered to read this thread. You don't belong here. Take your ignorance somewhere else. You are no match for this crowd.

JBG does a fine job of showing what "impute" is all about. I stated that this place needs proper moderators and JBG immediately imputed that this would involve the apparently sorry moderation seen at another site. JBG, try to stay focussed, will you?

And of course we have scriblett. A classic example of the Rue technique. Anybody who disputes the historical mythinformation laid on so thickly by the pro-Israel crowd is a "hater of Israel". As I have stated so many times, scriblett, all of the facts I cite come out of heavily researched and widely acclaimed works by internationally recognized Jewish Israeli historians. I don't recall you citing any of your references. Come to think of it scriblett, I don't recall seeing you bring anything new to any of these discussions at all. Just the same old tired slop and accusations regurgitated over and over and over.

[jbg]

JBG does a fine job of showing what "impute" is all about. I stated that this place needs proper moderators and JBG immediately imputed that this would involve the apparently sorry moderation seen at another site. JBG, try to stay focussed, will you?

Too much on the sauce lately?

I have no clue as to what you're talking about. What I'm saying is you seem to want moderators that would shut up the likes of myself, Rue, Scriblett and WestViking. You've just insulted perhaps three of the finest posters this Board has.

[Argus]

The british turned over there 'protecterate'??

You do mean someone elses country, filled with citizens of that country, right?

protectorate: is a political entity (a sovereign state or less developed native polity, such as a tribal chiefstainship or feudal princely state) that formally agrees by treaty to enter into an unequal relationship with another, stronger state, called the protector, which engages to protect it (diplomatically or, if needed, militarily) against third parties, in exchange for which the protectorate usually accepts specified obligations, which may vary greatly, depending on the real nature of their relationship.

So Britian failed under international law, like the US has in Iraq, to protect it's protectorate.

Rich!

Since there was no independent nation of Palestine, nor any people that identified themselves as "Palestinian" are you saying that the only people entitled to "protection" were worshipers of Allah, or thugs in the nature of Mohamed?

Yes, there was a nation, a sovereign nation, and that is a fact and that is that!

Go back at look at the UN language of the time, it is quite clear there was a Palestine, filled with it's own citizens, Palestinians.

Fact!

Historically - this claim is imbecilic. References to the people of Palestinie are in the same terms as referencing Mannitobans or Torontonians. There was no Palestinian nation or country. And, in fact, the area known as Palestine encompassed a much wider area, including all of present day Jordan.

[Higgly]

JBG does a fine job of showing what "impute" is all about. I stated that this place needs proper moderators and JBG immediately imputed that this would involve the apparently sorry moderation seen at another site. JBG, try to stay focussed, will you?

Too much on the sauce lately?

I have no clue as to what you're talking about. What I'm saying is you seem to want moderators that would shut up the likes of myself, Rue, Scriblett and WestViking. You've just insulted perhaps three of the finest posters this Board has.

I don't want moderators who will shut people up. I want moderators who will establish rules of order and apply them equally to all. Under Canadian law, acts of racism are a crime. Rue has repeatedly called me a racist and therefor a criminal. The criminalization of people requires a court judgment, not the opinion of an anonymous internet voice.

Jbg. Get a clue.

[Higgly]

Historically - this claim is imbecilic. References to the people of Palestinie are in the same terms as referencing Mannitobans or Torontonians. There was no Palestinian nation or country. And, in fact, the area known as Palestine encompassed a much wider area, including all of present day Jordan.

Cite your source for your claim that "Palestine encompassed a much wider area, including all of present day Jordan". And no Argus, Rue spew won't do.

And by the way, Argus. Learn how to spell. You are functioning at the level of an elementary school student.

[M.Dancer]

Cite your source for your claim that "Palestine encompassed a much wider area, including all of present day Jordan".

http://palestinefacts.org/images/map_mandate_overview.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...e_1481-1683.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...lestine1920.png

...common knowledge

[Higgly]

Cite your source for your claim that "Palestine encompassed a much wider area, including all of present day Jordan".

http://palestinefacts.org/images/map_mandate_overview.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...e_1481-1683.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...lestine1920.png

...common knowledge

And here I thought there might actually be a referreed journal or published work that would back up this crap. But what the hell. Everything you find on the internet is true, right?

[M.Dancer]

Cite your source for your claim that "Palestine encompassed a much wider area, including all of present day Jordan".

http://palestinefacts.org/images/map_mandate_overview.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...e_1481-1683.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...lestine1920.png

...common knowledge

And here I thought there might actually be a refereed journal or published work that would back up this crap

I don't know a bout a refereed journal...try Canoe sports.........you know, the non canwest site known for their coverage of refereed sports.....

How about Dartmouth College...too Ivy League ? Not enough Arab League....oh well

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~gov46/pal-mandate-sremo-1922.gif

You have a problem with wikipedia? Anyway.....

[Higgly]

I don't know a bout a refereed journal...try Canoe sports.........you know, the non canwest site known for their coverage of refereed sports.....

How about Dartmouth College...too Ivy League ? Not enough Arab League....oh well

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~gov46/pal-mandate-sremo-1922.gif

You have a problem with wikipedia? Anyway.....

Canoe is not Canwest Global? Go back to jail. Do not pass Go. No wonder you are citing internet sources. You haven't a clue.

Any idiot at Dartmouth can put up a web site. Colleges are all about free speech, right? And again, I ask you. Where is your referreed journal? Or do you know what a referreed journal really is? Be a sport. Dancer .

[WestViking]

Well, on third thought, why abandon the field to my lessers just because they behave like thugs?

West Viking dwells, as so many of Israel's supporters do, on the victim mythology Israel likes to spread so thickly. Note how West Viking just simply refers to "The Arabs". Apparently you know so little about the Middle East, you can't even distinguish between them. You probably think Iran is full of Arabs. Then there are the vague statements about the Palestinians never having owned anything. You apparently haven't even bothered to read this thread. You don't belong here. Take your ignorance somewhere else. You are no match for this crowd.

JBG does a fine job of showing what "impute" is all about. I stated that this place needs proper moderators and JBG immediately imputed that this would involve the apparently sorry moderation seen at another site. JBG, try to stay focussed, will you?

And of course we have scriblett. A classic example of the Rue technique. Anybody who disputes the historical mythinformation laid on so thickly by the pro-Israel crowd is a "hater of Israel". As I have stated so many times, scriblett, all of the facts I cite come out of heavily researched and widely acclaimed works by internationally recognized Jewish Israeli historians. I don't recall you citing any of your references. Come to think of it scriblett, I don't recall seeing you bring anything new to any of these discussions at all. Just the same old tired slop and accusations regurgitated over and over and over.

When you are out of lucid, supported argument all you can do is mount ad hominem attacks on those who do have valid arguments. Frankly, your posted opinion of me is a worthless as the rest of the drivel you post.

[Higgly]

When you are out of lucid, supported argument all you can do is mount ad hominem attacks on those who do have valid arguments. Frankly, your posted opinion of me is a worthless as the rest of the drivel you post.

Another valid argument from West Viking You've been a member for almost a year and have manged to mumble 67 posts. At least you know your place.

[BC_chick]

you're one of those sick people who stop at an accident scene to see if they can see any blood, ya? If you have nothing constructive to add (and I'll take my own advice after posting this) keep your cheerleading to yourself.

I noticed the same thing earlier on another board. Makes me wonder if it's ignorance, cowardice or just plain inability to express him/herself. But every contribution came in the form of an agreement, never a response to someone with whom s/he disagrees.

And before I get accused of doing the same thing - once in a blue moon, okay, we all do it. But I don't make a habit of ONLY contributing agreements.

[BC_chick]

snip

[BC_chick]

It is not possible to steal something from the Palestinians that they did did not own for over 500 years of Ottoman and British ownership and rule.

The other day there was an interesting story about an old man who had been living in a vacant piece of land in a posh area of London. Developers were planning on building condos there, but the old man proved in court that he'd been living on the land continuously for 20 years and he won his case according to British property laws. He is now the rightful owner of the land and is a millionaire.

Long story short, citing British ownership and rule may not be in your best in proving this specific point.

[Higgly]

The Ottoman Empire lost ownership and control over the lands of the Middle East in 1919 to Britain and France as the spoils of war. The Middle East was partitioned into French and British protectorates from 1919 to 1949. Following WW-II, the British turned over their protectorate to the United Nations for a resolution of valid land claims by both the Arabs and Jews. It is not possible to steal something from the Palestinians that they did did not own for over 500 years of Ottoman and British ownership and rule.

THe Ottoman Turks, the British and the Jordanians all granted land titles to Palestinian Arabs in the same way that you have title to the house you paid the mortgage on. Recently leaked Israeli government documents show that 45% of the land under illegal (Geneva Conventions) Israeli West Bank settlements is owned by Palestinian Arabs and 80% of the land under Ma'ale Adummin is owned by them.

I have posted this a number of times but apparently you like to just drop in and blat your simple-minded version of history and then scurry off into your little hidey hole again.

If you want to revert to the UN partition, take a look at the land that the UN granted to Israel and see how big it is now. Do a little reading and find out what happened to the poor people who lived in the lands Israel occupies now.

You have contributed absolutely nothing new to the discussion.

[Higgly]

Too much on the sauce lately?

I have no clue as to what you're talking about. What I'm saying is you seem to want moderators that would shut up the likes of myself, Rue, Scriblett and WestViking. You've just insulted perhaps three of the finest posters this Board has.

Well I missed the personal slur. Not surprised to see you revert to it since this seems to be the Israelite stock in trade. So you are calling me a drunkard are you? From now on JBG, I am going to refer to you as a coke addict.

JBG, the coke addict, refers to West Viking as being among the three finest posters here. How many posts does West Viking have now? 67? That coke really addles the brain, does it not JBG? 67 whole posts. Yes, yes. Mighty fine. Snort.

[BC_chick]

Too much on the sauce lately?

What I'm saying is you seem to want moderators that would shut up the likes of myself, Rue, Scriblett and WestViking. You've just insulted perhaps three of the finest posters this Board has.

JBG, the coke addict, refers to West Viking as being among the three finest posters here. How many posts does West Viking have now? 67? That coke really addles the brain, does it not JBG? 67 whole posts. Yes, yes. Mighty fine. Snort.

Um, there definitely seems to be a pesky little problem with counting numbers.

[kuzadd]

On second thought, I think I'll just give up on Maple Leaf Web. Much of what is posted here is about hate - either people hating the Arabs and Moslems or accusing others who disagree with them of acting out of hate. Desperation is so sad. Anybody who takes any time to delve into history can spot the tired old distortions, exaggerations and misrepresentations that Rue and the other Israelites have made their stock in trade. Those who can't are not sufficiently armed to be particularly dangerous anyways.

I think anyone can spot the distortions by those who hate Israel too, not to mention their exaggerations and misrepresentations. This is a case of pot - black

actually the case of distortions , lies firmly on the side of the 'Israelonly' gang, who seem to only use , 'exaggerations and misrepresentations,' to distort, lie, contort and generally revise , history.

Then when confronted with the work of a historian or some actual documentation, the 'Israelonly' gang resorts to name calling/smear, constantly displaying the weakness, in their own 'arguements'. If one can call irrational claptrap, an arguement?

[Higgly]

Then when confronted with the work of a historian or some actual documentation, the 'Israelonly' gang resorts to name calling/smear, constantly displaying the weakness, in their own 'arguements'. If one can call irrational claptrap, an arguement?

They all do it. Name calling, smearing. If we were identified by our actual names here, a libel lawyer could have a field day with the pro-Israel gang.

[kuzadd]

Then when confronted with the work of a historian or some actual documentation, the 'Israelonly' gang resorts to name calling/smear, constantly displaying the weakness, in their own 'arguements'. If one can call irrational claptrap, an arguement?

They all do it. Name calling, smearing. If we were identified by our actual names here, a libel lawyer could have a field day with the pro-Israel gang.

That thought has crossed my mind so many times!

and isn't it lucky for them?!

I wouldn't hesitate for a second, for as much money as I could get, either.

[jbg]

It is not possible to steal something from the Palestinians that they did did not own for over 500 years of Ottoman and British ownership and rule.

The other day there was an interesting story about an old man who had been living in a vacant piece of land in a posh area of London. Developers were planning on building condos there, but the old man proved in court that he'd been living on the land continuously for 20 years and he won his case according to British property laws. He is now the rightful owner of the land and is a millionaire. Long story short, citing British ownership and rule may not be in your best in proving this specific point.

The legal doctrine in question is called, at least in New York, "adverse possession". If someone is a tenant of an absentee landlord, as appeared to have been the way that the current State of Israel was (thinly) populated by resident Arabs, they were not in adverse possession. Adverse possession is actually the start of the running of the Statute of Limitations on an ejectment action. When that runs, the owner is helpless to bring an action. The real-world reason why a person would generally not try to acquire land that way is that if taxes aren't paid on the land for a period of time (in New York, three years) the land reverts to the Town, Village or City in which the land is located. So your example, however interesting, only bears on parcels that were not owned by absentee landlords collecting rent.

THe Ottoman Turks, the British and the Jordanians all granted land titles to Palestinian Arabs in the same way that you have title to the house you paid the mortgage on. Recently leaked Israeli government documents show that 45% of the land under illegal (Geneva Conventions) Israeli West Bank settlements is owned by Palestinian Arabs and 80% of the land under Ma'ale Adummin is owned by them.

No one is contending that the "settlements" on the West Bank are justified on the basis of purchase from Ottoman-era landlords. That is the result of hostile action and conquest, in wars very much provoked by the Arab inhabitants of that area.

I have posted this a number of times but apparently you like to just drop in and blat your simple-minded version of history and then scurry off into your little hidey hole again.

Too much sauce again?

If you want to revert to the UN partition, take a look at the land that the UN granted to Israel and see how big it is now. Do a little reading and find out what happened to the poor people who lived in the lands Israel occupies now.

Maybe if they had farmed rather than revving up for the abortive (from their viewpoint) 1948 and 1967 wars we wouldn't be having this discussion.

You have contributed absolutely nothing new to the discussion.

Another valid argument from West Viking You've been a member for almost a year and have manged to mumble 67 posts. At least you know your place.

Some people contribute in quantity, some in quality.

Too much on the sauce lately?

I have no clue as to what you're talking about. What I'm saying is you seem to want moderators that would shut up the likes of myself, Rue, Scriblett and WestViking. You've just insulted perhaps three of the finest posters this Board has.

Well I missed the personal slur. Not surprised to see you revert to it since this seems to be the Israelite stock in trade. So you are calling me a drunkard are you? From now on JBG, I am going to refer to you as a coke addict.

JBG, the coke addict, refers to West Viking as being among the three finest posters here. How many posts does West Viking have now? 67? That coke really addles the brain, does it not JBG? 67 whole posts. Yes, yes. Mighty fine. Snort.

That is a scurrilous personal slur. I have never been an addict of any kind. I am sorry if I referred to you as being drunk, in that post or this one, but when you go so far over the edge into incoherence, I wonder. You attacked the Board's moderation for posts of a temperate and gentlmanly manner. And in this one, you refer to my "Israelite stock in trade". Is that supposed to add ethnic to religious insult? What do you mean by "Israelite stock in trade"?

I challenge you.

Back to the substance of all of these posts, I cannot understand your view that heads the Jewish inhabitants of the land of Israel lose, tails the fighters, jihadis and warriors win. What do fighters, jihadis and warriors contribute to the world's welfare?