Posted on 12/05/2023 10:38:22 AM PST by SeekAndFind
For the record, the term “Palestinian” is a fictitious contrivance currently used to define the Arabs from various nations who migrated into Palestine in relatively recent times. “Palestinian” was once used to describe the Jewish Zionists who settled in what was then the Ottoman territory known as Palestine.
Also, unlike Palestine, the establishment of a nation of Kurdistan was included in the aftermath of the Versailles Treaty. As Lenin used to say, “promises are like pie crust...made to be broken.”
What is currently called Kurdistan is the border region where Iraq, Syria, Iran, and Turkey converge. Kurdish separatist tendencies are a perennial problem for the various regimes. Kurds are also not universally Muslim. Some are Zoroastrian or Christian. Others are even Jewish. Biblical Archaeology Review, in 2018, ran an article on Aramaic, the language of Jesus, which is still spoken by some Kurdish Jews. Jewish mourners’ kaddish is also in Aramaic.
The point is that, with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire at the end of the First World War, the Middle East was fractured, as were many of the lives of the people living there. Yet now all of the attention is focused on the “Palestinians” — drifters from Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, who came to the pre-existing Zionist enclave seeking economic opportunity.
Could it be that the rancor for Israelis being demonstrated outside the Middle East is an expression of latent antisemitism — particularly by the adherents of the political left? Could well be so.
I grew up thinking antisemitism was an obsolete concept. The awfulness of Hitler’s atrocities finally made racism, of any kind, unacceptable throughout the modern world. Before that, polite conversation often portrayed “those people” as being inferior, whoever they were. The serious quest for universal civil rights began with Hitler’s demise.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Discounting the fact these Arabs both Muslim and Christian lived in a region called Palestine a very long time along with Jews is kind of a canard
It was never a nation
It was governed by Turks and later Brits
But to act like since they never had a country of their own called Palestine that they somehow are irrelevant is bullshit
They did exist on that land
And many were displaced
And here we are
I guess we could kill 4-5 million of them and problem solved
It’s just going to grow and nobody wants them often for good reason
You lose a war and you lose a lot sometimes
Just ask most tribes east of the Mississippi
And who was there first is another bullshit argument
Everywhere had someone first
Israel was I guess proto Canaanite first
But there was someone even before them
It goes back to wars have consequences
Problem with this one is ex inhabitants nobody wants
Ben Gurion warned if this in 67
Kurds are, I think, the largest nation without country.
Divided between four countries, they are being persecuted in all of them.
After a lot of fighting, there are somewhat autonomous Kurdish zones in Iraq and Syria, but most Kurds actually live in Turkey and Iran.
There are freedom fighter in both Iran and Turkey, but not doing that well.
There should be independent Kurdistan, but for some reason, we (UN, US, etc.) are trying to keep the borders as it is c(why?)
Well Kurds, good luck!
I, personally support you, but unfortunately, I cannot help you.
Unlike “Palestinians”, the Kurds are distinguished nation (20-45 millions) with their own language (related to Persian), culture and history.
It is thought that they are descendants of ancient Medes, history going back at least to 600 BC.
But, they just have bad luck.
The article doesn’t say much about the Kurds. Title is a bit misleading.
It’s like yahoo saying WH officials ‘slammed’ the administration. Then you click it and the title becomes ‘frustrated’. Politico article getting translated funny.
Yes and Kurds are more capable as a fighting force obviously
But have poor leadership
Largest diaspora population of them is here in Nashville
They do OC almost at Albanian levels
Their conflict with Turkey and esp saddam is legendary for atrocities
Both sides
They have a lot in common with armenians. “No friends but the mountains”. How many of you knew that the azeri turks ethnically cleansed armenians from nagorno karabakh a few weeks ago?
Read up on history
I suggest Eric Cline’s “1177BC: The Year Civilization Collapsed”
The author is correct: there was no ancient Palestine. There were Canaanite areas along the coast that were among territory invaded by “ Sea People” who swept into the Med littoral, invaded, and by violence or assimilation, pretty much decimated existing trade routes, and contributed to the collapse of the bronze age and the Egyptian empire that was the controlling power.
There were 5 occupied city settlements and surrounding lands identified as “ Philistia”. This was in the southern area of modern Israel, including Gaza. Analysis of the DNA of ancient Philistia burials shows 25% Aegean ( Crete or Cyrpus) and 75% Canaanite. It is the Canaanites who should be throwing rocks at occupiers, not Pali arabs.
The Philistines who settled in other areas throughout Israel were defeated by a united Israel under David, who killed their great war hero Goliath and carried his sword into battle to avenge the death of King Saul and the mutilation of his son Jonathan, whose body was hung on the wall of Bet Shean.
If you visit that site today there is about a 10 story tel, or pile of rubble of city built on top of city. This whole “ who got there first owns the land” is a pali fake specious argument.
When their tribes united, theJews became the only power that really resisted the follow on empires. The Romans when adding this territory to their empire referred to it as “ Palestine” to subordinate and diminish the Jewish kingdom.
Of course the Ottomans would do the same when they took over
Jesus was born into a Roman subjugated land ruled by a token Jewish King Herod appointed by Rome because he was a willing vassal, ruthless to his own people, and his Jewish bloodline was “ non priestly/ royal)” so inferior class, and another demeaning act.
I better stop. Obviously a trip over there to visit these sites for yourself puts a whole perspective on the issue of who is an “occupier”. The international community, and the Jews, have been much more accommodating than deserved to the muslim usurpers aka Palestinians who showed up late to the party to plant “ palestinian” flags on ancient lands
I better stop. Obviously a trip over there to visit these sites for yourself puts a whole perspective on the issue of who is an “occupier”. The international community, and the Jews, have been much more accommodating than deserved to the muslim usurpers aka Palestinians who showed up late to the party to plant “ palestinian” flags on ancient lands
Yes, you should have stopped. The issue of who is an occupier was definitively answered by the UN Security Council Resolution 2334 (2016), linked and quoted below.
Resolution 2334 (2016)
Adopted by the Security Council at its 7853rd meeting, on
23 December 2016
The Security Council,
Reaffirming its relevant resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 446 (1979), 452 (1979), 465 (1980), 476 (1980), 478 (1980), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003), and 1850 (2008),
Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and reaffirming, inter alia, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,
Reaffirming the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and recalling the advisory opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice,
Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,
Expressing grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement activities are dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines,
Recalling the obligation under the Quartet Roadmap, endorsed by its resolution 1515 (2003), for a freeze by Israel of all settlement activity, including “natural growth”, and the dismantlement of all settlement outposts erected since March 2001,
Recalling also the obligation under the Quartet roadmap for the Palestinian Authority Security Forces to maintain effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantling terrorist capabilities, including the confiscation of illegal weapons,
S/RES/2334 (2016)
16-229202/3
Condemning all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation, incitement and destruction,
Reiterating its vision of a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders, Stressing that the status quo is not sustainable and that significant steps, consistent with the transition contemplated by prior agreements, are urgently needed in order to (i) stabilize the situation and to reverse negative trends on the ground, which are steadily eroding the two-State solution and entrenching a one-State reality, and (ii) to create the conditions for successful final status negotiations and for advancing the two-State solution through those negotiations and on the ground,
1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;
2. Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard;
3. Underlines that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations;
4. Stresses that the cessation of all Israeli settlement activities is essential for salvaging the two-State solution, and calls for affirmative steps to be taken immediately to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperilling the two-State solution;
5. Calls upon all States, bearing in mind paragraph 1 of this resolution, to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967;
6. Calls for immediate steps to prevent all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation and destruction, calls for accountability in this regard, and calls for compliance with obligations under international law for the strengthening of ongoing efforts to comba t terrorism, including through existing security coordination, and to clearly condemn all acts of terrorism;
7. Calls upon both parties to act on the basis of international law, including international humanitarian law, and their previous agreements and obligations, to observe calm and restraint, and to refrain from provocative actions, incitement and inflammatory rhetoric, with the aim, inter alia, of de -escalating the situation on the ground, rebuilding trust and confidence, demonstrating through polici es and actions a genuine commitment to the two-State solution, and creating the conditions necessary for promoting peace;
8. Calls upon all parties to continue, in the interest of the promotion of peace and security, to exert collective efforts to launch credible negotiations on all United Nations
S/RES/2334 (2016)
Security Council Distr.: General
23 December 2016
16-22920 (E)
*1622920*
Resolution 2334 (2016)
Adopted by the Security Council at its 7853rd meeting, on
23 December 2016
The Security Council,
Reaffirming its relevant resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 446 (1979), 452 (1979), 465 (1980), 476 (1980), 478 (1980), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003), and 1850 (2008),
Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and reaffirming, inter alia, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,
Reaffirming the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and recalling the advisory opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice,
Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,
Expressing grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement activities are dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines,
Recalling the obligation under the Quartet Roadmap, endorsed by its resolution 1515 (2003), for a freeze by Israel of all settlement activity, including “natural growth”, and the dismantlement of all settlement outposts erected since March 2001,
Recalling also the obligation under the Quartet roadmap for the Palestinian Authority Security Forces to maintain effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantling terrorist capabilities, including the confiscation of illegal weapons,
S/RES/2334 (2016)
16-229202/3
Condemning all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation, incitement and destruction,
Reiterating its vision of a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders, Stressing that the status quo is not sustainable and that significant steps, consistent with the transition contemplated by prior agreements, are urgently needed in order to (i) stabilize the situation and to reverse negative trends on the ground, which are steadily eroding the two-State solution and entrenching a one-State reality, and (ii) to create the conditions for successful final status negotiations and for advancing the two-State solution through those negotiations and on the ground,
1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;
2. Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard;
3. Underlines that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations;
4. Stresses that the cessation of all Israeli settlement activities is essential for salvaging the two-State solution, and calls for affirmative steps to be taken immediately to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperilling the two-State solution;
5. Calls upon all States, bearing in mind paragraph 1 of this resolution, to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967;
6. Calls for immediate steps to prevent all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation and destruction, calls for accountability in this regard, and calls for compliance with obligations under international law for the strengthening of ongoing efforts to comba t terrorism, including through existing security coordination, and to clearly condemn all acts of terrorism;
7. Calls upon both parties to act on the basis of international law, including international humanitarian law, and their previous agreements and obligations, to observe calm and restraint, and to refrain from provocative actions, incitement and inflammatory rhetoric, with the aim, inter alia, of de -escalating the situation on the ground, rebuilding trust and confidence, demonstrating through polici es and actions a genuine commitment to the two-State solution, and creating the conditions necessary for promoting peace;
8. Calls upon all parties to continue, in the interest of the promotion of peace and security, to exert collective efforts to launch credible negotiations on all
S/RES/2334 (2016)
3/316-22920
final status issues in the Middle East peace process and within the time frame specified by the Quartet in its statement of 21 September 2010;
9. Urges in this regard the intensification and acceleration of international and regional diplomatic efforts and support aimed at achieving, without delay a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet Roadmap and an end to the Israeli occupation that began in 1967; and underscores in this regard the importance of the ongoing efforts to advance the Arab Peace Initiative, the initiative of France for the convening of an international peace conference, the recent efforts of the Quartet, as well as the efforts of Egypt and the Russian Federation;
10. Confirms its determination to support the parties throughout the negotiations and in the implementation of an agreement;
11. Reaffirms its determination to examine practical ways and means to secure the full implementation of its relevant resolutions;
12. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council every three months on the implementation of the provisions of the present resolution;
13. Decides to remain seized of the matter.
A shame the Palestinians didn’t uphold the whole “terrorism” clause.
A shame the Palestinians didn’t uphold the whole “terrorism” clause.
It was just their good fortune that they did not have to uphold anything to establish, by international law, that the Israeli war of 1967 was one of aggression, and any land taken by anyone under such conditions is unlawfully occupied.
Moreover, Israel cannot assert any claim of self-defense in the Gaza attack. There can be no legal claim of self-defense to territory that does not belong to Israel and which is unlawfully occupied. There were certainly criminal acts of terror, but they did not occur within the state of Israel. They occurred in occupied Palestine.
In 1967, Israel declared a pre-emptive strike, something that has no meaning in international law. Nobody in the Middle East mess has clean hands. The UN and Britain had no right to create a Jewish state on land that had been muslim controlled for millenia. Creating nations is not exactly the purpose of the UN.
I’m quite familiar with Israel having worked Ramat Gan in the diamond business and am in contact with Israelis to this day for 35 years
I’m not a dispensationalist
My partners were all Yom Kippur vets I’ll ride with their perspective if that’s ok
Sorry
You are incorrect.
Britian controlled that land. It was theirs to do with as they pleased.
The Ottoman Empire was defeated.
You are incorrect.Britian controlled that land. It was theirs to do with as they please.
You are incorrect.
When the Balfour Declaration was issued in 1916, it was during WW1 and the land still belonged to the Turkish Ottoman Empire.
Later, when the Turkish Ottoman Empire fell, the Mandate for Palestine was set up by the League of Nations, and Britain was appointed to be the first Mandatatory. The Mandatory administered the territory for the League of Nations. The League of Nations controlled it. Later, the United Nations controlled it.
Britain merely acted as an administrator for the League of Nations/United Nations. The Mandate was terminated by the United Nations.
Mandatory Palestine was a geopolitical entity established between 1920 and 1948 in the region of Palestine under the terms of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine.
https://www.loc.gov/item/2021666887/
League of Nations
Mandate for Palestine
And Memorandum by the British Government Relating to its Application to Transjordan, Approved by the Council of the League of Nations on September 16th, 1922.
Title Page plus six pages each English and French.
MANDATE FOR PALESTINEWhereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and
Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstructing their national home in that country; and
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and
Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and
Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22, (paragraph 8) it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League of Nations;
Confirming the said mandate, defines its terms as follows:
Article 1
The Mandatory shall have full powers of legislation, save as they may be limited by the terms of this mandate.
Article 2
The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as wll secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.
Article 3
The Mandatory shall, so far as circumstances permit, encourage local autonomy.
[...]
https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-187751/
Future government of Palestine – GA debate – Verbatim record HUNDRED AND TWENTY-FOURTH PLENARY MEETINGHeld in the General Assembly Hall at Flushing Meadow, New York, on Wednesday,
26 November 1947, at 11 a.m.
President: Mr. O. ARANHA (Brazil)
123. Palestinian question: report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question (document A/516)
[...]
https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-178646/
Palestine question/Future government/Partition plan – Ad Hoc Cttee report, recommendationsREPORT OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION
Rapporteur: Mr. Thor THORS (Iceland)
1. The General Assembly, at its ninetieth meeting held on 23 September 1947, established an Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question, to which it referred the following items:
(a) Question of Palestine: item proposed by the United Kingdom (document A/286);
(b) Report of the Special Committee on Palestine (A/364);
(c) Termination of the Mandate over Palestine and the recognition of its independence as one State: item proposed by Saudi Arabia and by Iraq (A/317 and A/328).
[...]
Again, not their land. Thank you for admitting my point.
Wars have consequences. Perhaps if Al Husseini hadn’t encouraged the systemic massacre of Jews in that area during WW2, the world would have left them alone.
Again, not their land. Thank you for admitting my point.
Good to see you realize that it is well documented that Britain never owned the land of Palestine and was never more than an administrator for the League of Nations/United Nations. As a Mandatory, the appointee was an administrator empowered to carry out what the appointing body decided.
Hopefully, next time you will be encouraged enough to actually read the documents instead of just prattling on mindlessly about them.
Interesting how you glossed over their willful involvement of Jewish genocide during WW2 and how they aligned with Nazis.
They are lucky the world allowed them to remain standing at all.
Sorry, losers in wars don’t get to dictate terms.
Tells me everything I need to know about you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.