http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:HU5LhSupxIM:bbs.msnbc.com/bbs/msnbc-faith/posts/wj/436952.asp+
Ottoman+owned+palestine&hl=en
I would check your source. In Jerusalem alone in 1912,
the population in the city was 45,000 Jews, 25,000
Christians, and 10,000 Muslims (Ottoman Census of
Jerusalem of 1912)
By the way, there was no Palestinian state. The majority
of the land was owned by the ruling government--the
Ottoman Empire pre-WWI and the British post WWI. See one
poster's erudite discussion below.
A poster named "Tiger" wrote:
Subject: “By ’48 the Jews only owned 4% of Palestine!”
From : Tiger
I’ve heard this argument/phrase many times before, but I
have a problem with what is being implied by it. Let me
explain. It is often quoted by many posters on this forum
that by about the latter-half of 1947 to May 1948 – just
before Israel declared herself an independent state –
that all the Jewish groups combined owned a total of
3%(minimum) - 7%(maximum) of all territory in the
then British mandated Palestine. (Just out of interest to
anyone, some Jewish groups also owned small but
substantial property in then Trans-Jordan – what is
called The Kingdom of Jordan today --- the loss of which,
after ’48, they were never compensated for as memory
recollects.) Before I go any further just let me state
that from what I can determine this figure of
3%-7% is accurate as far as I can tell, sources
from both sides (Pro-Israeli and Pro-Palestinian Arab)
state figures within this range (the Pro- Palestinian
Arab sources tend to aim at the lower end of the scale:
3% and the Pro-Israel sources tend to aim at the
higher end of the scale: 7%). So far fine, it’s the
next part that the wheels come-off.Now all
anti-Israel/anti-Jewish posters who bring up this fact
that I have read then state that as all the Jewish groups
combined only controlled 3%-7% of all of British
mandated Palestine it thus logically follows that the
remaining 93%-97% must thus have and did,
emphatically they state, belong to the Palestinian Arabs.
This would give land-ownership ratios of 1:13 – 1:32 in
favour of the Palestinian Arabs. Thus the fact that the
Jews got so much is a MAJOR INJUSTICE and JUST PLAIN
WRONG they contend. It is this apparent enormous
disparity in land ownership that is used by
anti-Israel/anti-Jewish to call for things ranging from
Israel being more “amenable” in negotiations/making more
far more concessions than Barak offered; to the complete
destruction of Israel & the forced emigration of all/most
Jewish persons from that territory. On the face of it the
argument for the Pro-Palestinian Arab position looks
sound and who can content the numerical facts, right?
WRONG! , let me explain below.If the fact that all the
Jewish groups combined only controlled 3%-7% of
all of the land does it follow that the balance must have
thus belonged to the Palestinian Arab populous? As
yourself this question: who in any country in the world
(from dictatorships to democratic bastions like the
U.S.A, the U.K., ect.) owns/controls most of the land in
that country? The state of course and wasn’t that true
even as far back as the turn of this last centuary (and
further back than even that). This is true for any
country in the world. In every one of the countries in
the world the state is AWAYS by far the major stake
holder when it comes to property – and so by very huge
and significant proportions (always significantly more
than 50%). In you go back in time you will always
find this trend so. In the U.K. which has the highest
level of privately own land (about 5-10 years ago) the
state owned 61% of the total land mass of the U.K. In
other states this figure rises to 95% for some
countries. As stated above this is a trend that can be
seen true for every country in the world for the last
100+ years. Thus is it valid to state that the balance
of British mandated Palestine belonged to the Palestinian
Arabs? Not at all. The “government” of the day in British
mandated Palestine was the British mandated government
and they would have and DID control/own most of the land
– not the Palestinian Arabs. If memory serves me
correctly the total land owned by the Palestinian Arabs
was at the most 3-4 times that of the total owned by the
Jewish groups (i.e. 12% - 28% at a very maximum).
Thus whichever way you look at it the vast majority of
the land resided in the ownership and control of the
British mandated government of British mandated
Palestine. This one fact thus inevitably results in
certain undeniable truths:-1) I have often heard the
following been emphatically stated : (A) “The Jews STOLEN
Palestinian land”. This is often used in context of
referring to all of British mandated Palestine. (B)” Who
did(do) the British think they are giving Palestinian
land away?? !!!!!” ; once again referring to British
mandated Palestine. As can be seen by the above these two
arguments are swept away in a single stroke. Firstly the
majority of the land belonged to the British government
and they could ultimately sub-divide it as they choice,
whether it be at their own discretion or with the help of
the U.N. - and that is ultimately what they did (trying
to deal with fairly and often in regards to the numerous,
confusing & some times conflicting promises that they had
made). Another thing to think about is that the British
fought for and took it from the Ottoman Empire in W.W. I,
they paid in blood for it then. And they paid heavily for
it in blood to retain it (and Egypt) during W.W. II from
Rommel’s Africa Corps and the Italians. Would that give
them even further say in its final end particularly as
they owned most of the land of British mandated
Palestine? I would say YES.2) Secondly (and this relates
to the statement of “....STOLEN land....”) British
mandated Palestine was never the almost exclusive the
property of the Palestinian Arab people to be “stolen” by
the Israelis when it was subdivided, it was never theirs
to be stolen from during the sub-division; it belonged to
the British government. Some may say “....It was stolen
during the ensuing conflict!.....” and this is the real
crux of the matter. However my reading of the situation
is that firstly the British & the world saw that the two
groups just could not live together (and both parties
made mistakes in this regard) so they came sub-divided
the land. The Jewish people were happy but the
Palestinian Arab people and their surrounding neighbours
weren’t and the rest is as they “history”. In the end the
Palestinian Arab people lost their chances for a state
and this mostly because of their and their neighbours
insistence on conflict to unite/”liberate” and “divided”
land. But in the end the land was not ONE COUNTRY
forcibly divided (like former East and West Germany) but
British property (British mandated Palestine was never a
self standing state, but always a province or
protectorate of some sourt). So how does sub-division of
some-elses property equate to theft? It DOESN’T! Did many
Palestinian Arabs and Arab Israelis lose their private
property? Yes - however it should be stated too that the
Israeli government has undertaken a number of steps to
undo in one way or another this loss of property. First
the majority of the private property “lost” (or fled
from) in ‘48 (and later conflicts) has where possible
been put under the administration of an Islamic Waqf
until proper ownership can be ascertained. Furthermore
the Israeli government is prepared to compinisate the
owenrs of private land that cannot (given to other
private tenants) or will not be returned. An estimated
maximum of 200 000 claims or so were expected, however
the Palestinian Arabs have been slow in approaching the
Israeli government on the subject and so far only 20 000
claims have been made and settled. Why the reason for
such a low rate? Well it is considered tantamount to
treason among the Palestinian Arab populous in general to
undertake such legal action and it would be conspiring
with the enemy. And although the system is not perfect at
least the Israelis are prepared in the most part to try.
And if all else fails the Palestinian Arab people do have
access to the Israeli High Court (Israel’s attempt to try
to “iron-out” those imperfections). So how can it be
theft/stealing when the Israel government is trying to
give the land back fairly or (the preferred option)
compensate the Palestinian Arab people for their loss?3)
Thirdly the majority of the land (which did belong to the
British mandated Government) was been transferred from
that state to the two newly to be formed states (“Israel”
and “Palestine”), in other words it was going from
state-land to state-land/s. Private property would remain
in the hands of their present owners, just that they
would fall under one state’s or the other’s
administration as the land was sub-divided. Thus in the
end why do the Pro-Palestinian Arab posters keep on
insisting on treating this whole subject as if it was a
dispute ownership of private property? Such a forum is
not the way to address the problem of the statehood of
the Israelis or the Palestinian Arab peoples. However to
change to forum to something more suitable would require
that the follow applies :- It would mean that the
Palestinian Arab people do not have a
higher/greater/more-moral right to the land (or parts the
of) of the former British mandated Palestine than the
Israeli people and so invalidate or make less valid the
Israeli peoples right to the self same land (or parts
there of). THE PRO-PALESTINIAN POSTERS SUCH REMARKS JUST
DON’T MAKE SENCE NOR ARE THEY VALID ARGUEMENT IN SUCH
FORM.4) Lastly it is strange that the Jewish people who
did flee in huge number from the Arab/Muslim countries
during and after ‘48 (and the greater weight of evidence
suggests that the co-ersed because the were Jewish and so
pro-Israel and so to be targeted for discrimination) have
never been compensated, not one cent. There is no
structure that has been set up to allow them to regain
their property or to compensate them - not one that I am
aware of in the countries they fled. Isn’t that “also”
unfair, more unfair than the Israeli system? And how
about their right to return and that of the descendants?
If the Palestinian Arabs are allowed to make claims that
this must be allowed to themselves, wouldn’t it apply
equally to the Jewish people who fled and their
descendants. I know that many will say “The Israelis MUST
do it FIRST, then we will do the same for these Jews” but
that does not wash with me. Why haven’t they made these
suggestions in the past (but rather usually the complete
opposite)? Why haven’t suggested this to the Israelis on
an official level as the Israelis have already done (as
far back as just after the ‘48 war)? Why is the situation
so one way on this subject? why?RegardsThe Tiger
On Thu Oct 4 19:44:11, Rob wrote:
> Why was Israel there in the first place? It was not
> their land. 1911 the population was
> 900,000pal/30,000isrl. How did that become
> 2,000,000/5,000,000? They came in and loved the
> Palestinian's to death?
>
> You can't win land that doesn't belong to you. That's
> call colonialism. You know, doesn't the very fact that
> they call themselves "settlers" mean something to
> you? If they "won" it and it was their land,
> they wouldn't have to settle it.
>
> Although I don't like the Saud's much, in the 1940's,
> King Fahd once said "The Palestinian's didn't kill 6
> million Jews, the Germans did, why didn't they give them
> a nice chunk of Germany?"
>
> Regards.
>
> On Thu Oct 4 19:39:54, History wrote:
> > Yes. England gave up Palestine to the UN to find a
> > solution. UNSCOP proposed the UN Partition Plan of 1947,
> > but couldn't enforce it, thus "gave" nothing to
> > the Jews. The Jews accepted UNSCOP's plan, the Arabs did
> > not and went to war. The Jews fought for the land,
> > outmanned and outgunned, yet miraculously won--but
> > (without the idea of a miracle) they had no choice. They
> > had no where else to go; it was (as we say in the
> > military) "do or die." The "did" and did
> > well. The Zionists movements (yes, there were more than
> > one) had been working against odd with numerous
> > governments for a Jewish homeland since the infamous
> > Dreyfus trial of 1894. There was even a time when Uganda
> > was to be this homeland (1903), but while one Zionist
> > party was considering this, others were aiding Jews (pre-
> > and post WWII) to escape the pogropms of Eastern Europe
> > and the growing oppression in Western Europe to join the
> > Jews who already lived in Palestine under the old Ottoman
> > Empire. These pioneers were knowledgeable and through
> > the late 1800's up to WWII had brought their skills to
> > change arid wastes and disease-ridden swamplands into
> > pasture for agriculture--by their own strength and their
> > own will. Today, without oil or even sufficient natural
> > water resources, Israelis (Jew, Muslim, Christian, et.
> > al.) have the highest standard of living per capita in
> > the Middle-East through service industries as well as
> > agriculture.
> >
> > Any other questions?
> >
> > History
> >
> > On Thu Oct 4 19:07:54, McGee wrote:
> > > the UN divided Israel and gave land to the
> > > "Jews." The Zionists worked politically
> > > throughout WWII to make a land-grab for Israel. The US
> > > funds Israel. Israel has practically no aerable land and
> > > trades almost no oil. Israel has done everything itself?
> > > By its own strength and ambition? Your claims are too
> > > broad.
|