Please don't introduce archaeology into this, you might discover that Jerusalem didn't exist in the time of David and Solomon, who themselves may not ever have existed. As for the Jewish Temple, well it's not where everyone thinks it is according to many archaologists. Also, the monotheist religious cult we know as Judaism was not the main religion of the inhabitants of the area, neither in Biblical times nor in historic times. The indigenous people of the area are known to have followed many faiths/cults/religions and worshipped many Gods and in time have been "pagan", "Jewish", "Christian" and latterly "Muslim" until the foreign imposition of "Judaism" again. The land belongs to the indigenous inhabitants, not the Europeans who colonised it in the late 19th early 20th centuries.
Challenger; et al, This is arguably correct. (COMMENT) BUT, Civil Land ownership has nothing to do with the transfer of territorial authority from the Ottoman/Turk to the Allied Powers. First, there was the Unconditional Surrender (Mudros Armistice), then the Treaty of Sèvres; and finally the Treaty of Lausanne (Article 16): ARTICLE I6. Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned. And with that "title and rights" renounced by the Ottoman/Turks and remanded to the Allied Powers, the Allied Powers have agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. The Mandate (for Palestine) adopted by the Council of the League of Nation, comprised a collection of provisions defining the manner in which the principles laid down by the Covenant are to be applied. The Mandate for Palestine (1922) included a number of provisions which would stipulate a policy that encouraged the establishment of a Jewish National Home for the Jewish people. Under the terms of the Mandate, the territory to which the Mandate applied was to set political, administrative and economic conditions beneficial for the Jewish National Home. Self-governing institutions to that end, were to be developed. Also the safeguards over civil and religious rights of the indigenous inhabitants of the territory were to be installed. The Mandate would also recognize the Jewish Agency as a quasi-Public Body to advise and co-operate with the territorial administration. While not recognized at the time, this was the foundation for future disputes. Most Respectfully, R
RE: Abu Mazen: Pre-67 Land Also "Occupied" Abu Mazen (President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas) did not represent the Palestinians in 1967 (pre or post War). The West Bank was Sovereign Jordanian Territory, and the Gaza Strip was an Egyptian Military Governorship. The reasons for the 1967 Six Day War is a completely different topic and discussion. However, it is historical and customary law --- that payments intended to cover damage or injury inflicted during the 1967 War (compensation for war damaged) owed by the aggressor or party considered the proximate cause [(the Arab League) held to be the cause of that injury]. The Arab Palestinians had no sovereignty or governmental standing (legal right to initiate a lawsuit) until 1988. Thus they cannot claim something for which was in the province of the Egyptians or Jordanians; prior to 1988. Since the closure of the Six Day War, the Arab Palestinian has made every effort to conduct terrorist operations, Jihadist activities and insurgency operations against Israel. They owe War Reparations. • The Cost of Human Losses (civilian domestic and international). • The Cost of Interdiction and Security Investigations and Countermeasure. • The Cost of Damages and losses to economic concerns and financial interests. There are no losses or outstanding debts associated with Egypt or Jordan; that were not settled by Peace Treaty. Most Respectfully, R
Israel confiscated millions of dumans of land inside Israel that formally belonged to Palestinians that were refugees across the border and also internal refugees.
The Arabs are not indigenous the the Land of the Jews!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you do not know that much please check this in a library... The Arabs since Mohammad of the seventh century have been at war with the World for the past 1400 years!!! The Jews have the right to return to their homeland!!! No amount of rewriting history is going to help.
The only people rewriting history are the Zionists. The facts are that the indigenous population of the region have always been there,subject to the normal minor changes brought about through movements of people in and out of the region, natural or man made disasters, etc. over the centuries. Such people have at one time or other have adopted the language and culture of whoever was in charge at the time, be they Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Romans, Arabs, French, Turks. Latterly, the indigenous population adopted Arabic language and culture which they have continued for the last thousand years or so. However you want to spin it, Zionist Jewish Europeans are not indigenous to the region.
Hello Rocco R, nice to see you. maybe we can have a chat here without the chest thumping, drum beating nonsense we have to put up with elsewhere. You make an interesting point regarding war reparations; are we to infer from your comment that the French, Polish, Dutch, Norwegian, Belgian, etc resistance movements of WW2 owe Germany war reparations for continuing to conduct insurgency (terrorist) operations against German occupying forces and transferred populations?
Glad to hear it, that means any Palestinian refugee can return to the property they owned prior to 1948 if they can show title, does it not?
Invention of the Jewish People http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/973 Excerpt Of all of the sins of modern Israel, putting their historians in intellectual straight-jackets and censoring their writing is not high on the list.(4) Similar to the buzz that accompanied Daniel Goldhagens Hitlers Willing Executioners (5) (and likewise netted its author hefty returns), there are many expressing strong opinions about Sands book who do not seem to have read it, and have little or no basis for offering an informed judgment as to its merits or defects. What Sand shares with Goldhagen is the reason for their books' flying off the (actual and virtual) shelves: an apparent willingness and passion to simplify and distort scholarly discourse in order to produce a seductive, monocausal explanation. This fires the gut-instinct of thousands of avid readers who style themselves as educated yet who mainly seek scholarly sanction for their existing worldview. For both Goldhagen and Sand this is marketing to the converted and giving them what they want which is not to say, though, that Goldhagen and Sand are in any doubt as to the veracity of their arguments. The reception of The Invention of the Jewish People, like Hitlers Willing Executioners, has been dominated by emotion. We can assume that Sands brisk sales (outside of Israel) primarily are of those of the for camp those in agreement about the degree to which the Jewish people was invented for Zionist and Israeli purposes. The cover of the (British) English-language edition, in bold Zionist azure, acclaims its status as an INTERNATIONAL BESTSELLER. The myth of the Jewish people, as propagated by modern Israel, in Sands terms, exists in inverse proportion to the authentic historical basis of Jewrys claim to peoplehood, and even more tenuously (and disturbingly), its ancestral homeland of Palestine. Yet there is a bizarre symmetry to this book, as a phenomenon, and Sands argument about Israel. Sand infers that Jews are not an authentic people (compared to other nations), and Israel, contrary to the old tourist slogan, is not real. With a little critical distance, it is possible to criticize this book as a far cry from a real work of scholarship. It is flimsy, haphazardly built, slap-dash. There is no foundation in archival research, and Sand does not seem to have fully read (or understood) many of the secondary works on which his thesis relies. He apparently has never heard of Aviel Roshwald and George Mosse, who are among the first names that should spring to mind in any consideration of Jews and nationalism.(
Arabs aren't a religion. I think the point is that Palestinians are descended from Jewish farmers who didn't leave.. They became Christians and Muslims and stayed in Palestine farming the Roman terraces , tending their olive trees, mending and maintaining the Roman irrigation systems.
most Palestinians are descended from Muslim immigrants to Palestine over the last 1,200 years. they are Arabs, Berbers, Persians, Bosnians, Egyptians, Ethiopians, Kurds, etc. a small minority, are descended from Jews and Christians who were forced into Muhammedism.
Pure unadulterated fantasy... Very few Arabs could prove ownership of land for the majority were Land Tillers. Here is a paper from my school days depicting exactly the ownership of that land. The question of land ownership in Israel - or before 1948, Palestine Mandate - has been the subject of much discussion. What is the status of the land on which, from the end of the nineteenth century, Jewish settlements - kibbutzim, moshavim, villages, and cities - were established? For decades, Arab propaganda has been reiterating the claim that, legally and ethically, the Arabs are the true owners of the land and that the portion actually belonging to the Jews is minute. The Arab claim rests on two premises: (1) At the latter part of the nineteenth century, the Palestinian Arabs were living and cultivating their lands in peace and security, until the European Jewish immigrants drove them from their territory, creating a large class of landless and dispossessed Arabs; (2) In 1948 a small Jewish minority, which owned only 5% of the territory of the country, took over the 95% that belonged to the Arabs, and, illegally and immorally, established the State on that territory. It is necessary at this point to examine the state of the land and its inhabitants during the period of Turkish rule. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries - long before the beginning of modern Jewish settlement and Jewish acquisition of land - the population of the country was minuscule and continually decreasing. In 1738, the land was described by the English archaeologist Thomas Shaw as "lacking in people to till its fertile soil" (Travels and Observations Relating to Several Parts of Barbary and the Levant). The French historian Conte Constantine Francois Volney writes: "The peasants are incessantly making inroads on each other's lands, destroying their corn, durra, sesame and olive-trees, and carrying off their sheep, goats and camels. The Turks, who are everywhere negligent in repressing similar disorders, are attentive to them here, since their authority is very precarious. The Bedouin, whose camps occupy the level country, are continually at open hostilities with them, of which the peasants avail themselves to resist their authority or do mischief to each other, according to the blind caprice of their ignorance or the interest of the moment. Hence arises an anarchy which is still more dreadful than the despotism that prevails elsewhere, while the mutual the contending parties renders the appearance of devastation of this part of Syria more wretched than that of any other." (Travels Through Syria and Egypt in the Years 1783, 1784, and 1785) There were, in addition to the local disputes, actual wars. In the beginning of the nineteenth century Napoleon's armies invaded the land; in 1831 it was conquered by the Egyptians, and nine years later again by the Turks. All these - in addition to the internal fighting - created in the country a climate of insecurity, which led to a sharp decline in its physical state and to the emigration of its inhabitants, who left in search of better living conditions elsewhere. Many of those who nevertheless stayed and continued to work their land were forced to relinquish ownership of it and find refuge with people of means or with the Muslim religious endowment fund ("the wakf"). A situation was created, then, in which the true owners of the lands did not reside on them, but leased them to others while they themselves spent their lives in such distant places as Damascus, Beirut, and Cairo. H. B. Tristram, who wrote of his travels in the Holy Land in his 1865 book The Land of Israel.- A Journal of Travels in Palestine, presents a revealing description of the living conditions in the Land of Israel as he found them in the middle of the nineteenth century: "A few years ago, the whole Ghor (Jordan Valley) was in the hands of the Fellahin = (Imported Land tillers) and much of it cultivated for corn. Now the whole of it is in the hands of the Bedouin = (Marauding Nomads), who eschew all agriculture except in a few spots cultivated here and there by their slaves; and with the Bedouin come lawlessness and the uprooting of all Turkish authority. No government is now acknowledged on the east side; and unless the Porte = (Turkish Leader) acts with greater firmness and caution than is his wont... Palestine will be desolated and given up to the nomads." Alexander Keith, recalling Volney's 1785 description (quoted above) fifty years later, commented: "In his day [Volney's] the land had not fully reached its last degree of desolation and depopulation." (The Land of Israel). Other travelers and pilgrims recorded similar reports of the dreary state of the Land around the middle of the nineteenth century. Here are just a few examples: Alphonse de Lamartine, in 183: "...a complete eternal silence reigns in the town, on the highways, in the country ... the tomb of a whole people" (Recollections of the East, Vol. I, p. 30. A contemporary German encyclopedia (Brockhaus, "Allegmeine deutsche Real-Encyklopaidie", Vol. VIII, p. 206, Leipzig, 1827) calls Palestine "desolate and roamed through by Arab robber-bands." In 1849, the American W. F. Lynch described the desertion of Palestinian villages "caused by the frequent forays of the wandering Bedouin" (Narrative of the United States Expedition to the River Jordan and the Dead Sea, p. 489). And again H. B. Tristram, in 1865: "... both in the north and south (of the Sharon plain), land is going out of cultivation, and whole villages are rapidly disappearing from the face of the earth. Since the year 1838, no less than 20 villages have been thus erased from the map (by the Bedouin) and the stationary population extirpated" (p. 490). Better known in this context, perhaps, are the words of the American author Mark Twain, who records personal impressions of a visit to the Holy Land in 1867. His account abounds in descriptions such as these: "Desolate country whose soil is rich enough but is given over wholly to weeds - a silent mournful expanse We reached Tabor safely ... We never saw a human being on the whole route" (p. 451, 480); "There is not a solitary village throughout its (the Jezreel Valley's) whole extent - not for thirty miles in either direction. There are two or three small clusters of Bedouin tents but not a single permanent habitation. One may ride ten miles, hereabouts, and not see ten human beings" (p. 44; "Of all the lands there are for dismal scenery, I think Palestine must be the prince. The hills are barren ... the valleys are unsightly deserts... It is a hopeless, dreary, heartbroken land... Palestine is desolate and unlovely... Palestine is no more of this workday world. It is sacred to poetry and tradition - it is dreamland" (pp. 564, 567). Referring to the same era, the Christian historian James Parkes writes in "Whose Land"? "Peasant and Bedouin alike have contributed to the ruin of the countryside on which both depend for a livelihood... In spite of the immense fertility of the soil, it is probable that in the first half of the nineteenth century the population sank to the lowest level it had ever known in historic times." Conclusion: The propagandist myth of an "entire Palestinian people uprooted from its soil by the Zionists" is shattered against the reality of the nineteenth century: plunder and devastation, war and destruction, chaos, anarchy, a population dispersed and declining. All this occurred many years before the beginning of the Zionist settlement, while the Jewish population still resided in the "Holy Cities" of Jerusalem, Hebron, Tiberias, and Safed, long before these Jews together with Jewish immigrants from the lands of the Diaspora began purchasing land and tilling the soil. Moreover, at the end of the nineteenth century the Jewish pioneers began to make the desert areas of the land bloom, rendering the country highly attractive to Jews and Arabs alike. It is an undisputed fact that after World War I the pattern of Arab emigration was reversed: Until that time, the number of Arabs who left the land exceeded that of those who came to live in it. Starting in the 1920s, there were more immigrants than emigrants. In addition, where did they settle? Usually in those areas which did the Jewish settlers develop! What was the state of the land - its ownership and cultivation - at the end of the period of Turkish rule? Most of the territory was concentrated in the hands of a few wealthy landlords, most of whom lived far from their property. In many cases these lands were, or seemed, unfit for agriculture, and were therefore neither settled nor cultivated. Tenant farmers worked occasional plots. According to a Turkish register drawn up shortly before World War 1, there were at that time 3,130,000 Dunams in the hands of 144 landlords that is, approximately 22,000 Dunams average per family. In the Nablus and Tul-Karem districts, five families held 157,000 Dunams, of which the Husseini family owned 50,000 Dunams in various parts of the country, and the Abdel-Hadi family 60,000. The largest single holding, 230,000 Dunams in the Jezreel valley, was in the hands of the Sursuk family, which resided in Beirut and Cairo. The Palestinian peasant, then, was indeed exploited and at times dispossessed, not by the Jewish settler, but rather by his fellow-Arabs: the local sheiks, the Bedouin village elders, the Turkish tax collector, the merchants and moneylenders (at interest rates as high as 60%), and if he was a tenant-farmer = imported Land Tiller, as was usually the case, by the absentee landlord as well. When considering the issue of the lands which passed from Arabs to Jews, and on which the pioneering Zionist settlement was founded, six facts should be borne in mind: (1) The Land was paid in full!! (2) Most of the land purchased involved large tracts belonging to absentee landlords. (3) Most of the land acquired was uncultivated because it was swampy, sandy, or rocky, or for other reasons considered unsuitable for agriculture. (4) For this reason, the initial purchases did not involve large sums of money, but with the passage of years the price of land began to rise as Arab landowners took advantage of the growing demand for rural tracts. (5) Modern agricultural methods introduced by the Jewish pioneers, which improved the lands and increased their yield, were quickly adopted by the neighboring Arab farmers. (6) The number of farmers forced to leave their land due to the Zionist undertaking was relatively very small. All those who left were compensated in accordance with the law, either by monetary payment or by other agricultural land; and indeed most continued to be farmers. Furthermore, a large number of Arabs from other parts of the country or from neighboring countries settled in the areas developed by the Jews. Following are some revealing statistics: (1) Out of the 429,887 Dunams acquired by PICA (Palestine Jewish Colonization Association) from private landowners between 1880 and 1947, 293,545 Dunams - close to 70% - were large tracts of uncultivated land, most of which belonged to absentee landlords. (2) The purchases of the Palestine Land Development Corporation included an even greater percentage of large tracts - approximately 90% (455,169 Dunams out of 512,979, which were purchased of private owners). If we add to this the 66,513 Dunams of Beersheba desert land and the swamps of the Hula Valley, we will find that the purchases of the corporation totaled close to 580,000 Dunams. (3) A third body which purchased property in Palestine was the Jewish National Fund, which leased the lands to groups or individual settlers for periods of forty-nine or ninety-nine years, in accordance with the principle that the Land of Israel belongs to the Jewish People, and no one has the right to hold permanent ownership of Israeli soil. In the first thirty years of its existence, the JNF acquired 270,084 Dunams, of which 239,170 (close to 90%) were large tracts. This percentage dropped during subsequent years, but of the total area of 566,312 Dunams purchased by individuals, at least 50% were large tracts of land which was either totally uncultivated or only superficially cultivated. The prices paid by Jewish individuals and organizations for property in Palestine reached, during the 1930s, legendary proportions. The Palestine Royal Commission ("the Peel Commission") of 1937 reported that in the year 1933 alone sums totaling 854,769 Pounds sterling were paid; in 1934 the total reached 1,647,836 Pounds sterling and in 1935, 1,699,488 Pounds sterling. During those three years alone, then, the total sum paid to Arab landlords reached 4,202,180 Pounds sterling, which was the equivalent of over $20 million at the time. Ten years later, in 1944, an acre (4 Dunams) of good, fertile land in the State of Iowa cost $ 100, while in that same year Jews in Palestine were paying over $ 1,000 for an acre of parched soil. The claim that the Arabs were being driven out was raised as early as the 1930s. This claim was investigated by the British, and rejected almost completely - and this at a time when British policy in Palestine was clearly moving from a pro-Zionist to a pro-Arab position. Two official British documents from the year 1937 deal with this claim. One is the report of the Peel Commission (Chapter 9, Par. 61), which relates that during the years 1920-1939, 688 Arab tenant farmers were removed from their land as a result of purchases made by the Jews. Five hundred twenty-six of the Arab farmers remained in some agricultural occupation, and four hundred received alternative plots of land in other locations. The second document is one of a series of memoranda prepared by the mandatory government and published in London (Colonial No. 133, p. 37). It contains the findings of the 1931 investigation of Lewis French, which totally refute the claim that the Zionist undertaking in Palestine caused the creation of "an entire landless people among the Palestinian Arabs". The memorandum notes that the total number of applications of registration as landless Arabs reached 3,271. Of these, the claims of 2,607 were rejected as not belonging to this category, and only 664 heads of families were recognized as having legitimate claims. Approximately half this number - 347 - agreed to accept the government's offer of resettlement. The rest refused, either because they had found employment elsewhere, or because they were unaccustomed to the agricultural methods, such as irrigation, employed in the new locations, or because of other reasons. In his investigation of the hill country, where the Jewish purchases were minimal, Lewis French found that out of seventy-one Arab claims of eviction, sixty-eight were rejected (The Esco Foundation for Palestine, Inc., Vol. II, p. 716). Finally What was the land ownership situation when the State of Israel was established in 1948? According to the official data published by the outgoing British mandatory administration before the establishment of the State (Survey of Palestine, 1946), only 8.6% of the land was in fact owned by Jews, while over 70% was state land, which had passed from Turkish to British authority and now to Israel, the legal heir of the British Mandate. The remaining lands - 33% belonged to Arab landowners, and the Arab owners who hastened to obey the call of their leaders to clear the way for the Arab armies, which would annihilate the Jewish State, abandoned 16.9%. These landowners did not consider the possibility that the Jewish State would remain. The key to the entire problem lies in that large percentage of state land, most of which was in the Negev - an unsettled area of approximately 12,557,00 Dunams, or close to 50% of the entire area (26,320,000) of mandatory Palestine. These lands had never been under Arab ownership, neither during the period of British rule nor even during the preceding Turkish regime, these were simply STATE LANDS . The contention heard time and again from Arab propagandists - that 95% of the territory of Palestine had belonged to the Arabs - is, therefore, entirely without basis in fact...! To those that think differently without any substantiation I say No amount of Monday morning quarter backing is going to help your belated dreaming There was no ARAB country in the middle east called Palestine... the place was called the Ottoman Empire for 400 years until 1917 when the British Forces Liberated it from the Turks and received a Mandate to manage it They governed it for the next 30 years until 1948.. The Brits recognized the right of the Jews to the Land of their forefathers... Palestine Arab nationalism to whatever degree it is conscious ideal today, is a product of recent political currents. Until the 1920s, no such national community had even existed in Palestine. This is why the Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations Mandates charged the Jews of the National Home with guaranteeing the civil and religious right of other inhabitants... (The Arabs, Christians, Druze, Circassians, Kurds, Armenians, Bosnians, Moghrabim [North Africans], Egyptians, Syrian, Bedouins... were the other inhabitants.) No mention was made of other National Rights of other inhabitants..., as it was recognized that the only NATIONAL CLAIM to the Area was that of the Jews...!! However, the FICTION of Palestine Arab Nationality is still being exploited. If the Palestinian Arabs were in fact a separate nationality, their anger should have been directed against Jordan and Egypt since these were the two countries that invaded duly Reconstituted Israel in 1948, and retained a substantial amount of Real Estate. (Jordan... Judea and Samaria and Egypt the Gaza area...) and never even considered creating a Palestinian Arab Entity there for nineteen years... Now if you had an Atlas from let say from 1517 on to 1917 when the British took over... you would have noticed that the place was called THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE for FOUR HUNDRED years and NOTHING ELSE...! There was NEVER a Palestine ! No independent Arab or Palestinian State ever existed in Palestine. When the distinguished Arab-American historian, Princeton University Prof. Philip Hitti, testified against partition before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, he said: "There is no such thing as 'Palestine' in history, absolutely not. In fact, Palestine is never explicitly mentioned in the Qur'an, rather it is called "the holy lands" (al-Arad al-Muqaddash) At that time, Palestinian Arabs did not view themselves as having a separate identity. When the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations met in Jerusalem in February 1919 to choose Palestinian representatives for the Paris Peace Conference, the following resolution was adopted, quote:- We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. National, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds connect us with it... Unquote. In 1937, a local Arab leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, told the Peel Commission, which ultimately suggested the partition of Palestine: "There is no such country [as Palestine]! 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria." The representative of the Arab Higher Committee to the UN submitted a statement to the General Assembly in May 1947 that said, "Palestine was part of the Province of Syria" and that, "politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the sense of forming a separate political entity." A few years later, Ahmed Shuqeiri, later the chairman of the PLO, told the Security Council: "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria." Palestinian Arab nationalism is largely a post World War I phenomenon that did not become a significant political movement until after 1967 Six-Day War [since the PLO was created by Egypt in 1964]... and Israel's liberation of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) from the occupying forces of Jordan.
Forced into Christianity or Islam? I sure can't recall any history about that. Arabs have been in Palestine since the time of Abraham.. Remember that both Abraham and Moses had Arab wives..
yes, Im sure Saudi Arabia teaches that at no point in history did Muslims ever impose islam upon the peoples that they conquered.
Forced conversion to Islam A form of forced conversion became institutionalized during the Ottoman Empire in the practice of devşirme, a human levy in which Christian boys were seized and collected from their families (usually in the Balkans), enslaved, converted to Islam, and then trained as elite military unit within the Ottoman army or for high-ranking service to the sultan.[49] From the mid to late 14th, through early 18th centuries, the devşirme–janissary system enslaved an estimated 500,000 to one million non–Muslim adolescent males.[50] These boys would attain a great education and high social standing after their training and conversion.[51] There were conversions in the 12th century under the Almohad dynasty of North Africa and Andalusia. Reports from the period describe that, after an initial 7-month grace period, the Almohads killed or forcefully converted Jewish communities in each new city they conquered until "there was no Jew left from Silves to Mahdia."[52] Cases of mass martyrdom of Jews who refused to convert to Islam are also reported.[53] There is dispute amongst scholars as to whether the famous Jewish philosopher Maimonides converted to Islam in order to freely escape from Almohad territory, and then reconverted back to Judaism in either the Levant or in Egypt.[54] Maimonides wrote a book on apostasy wherein he advocated accepting forced conversion rather than suffer martydom, and to then seek refuge afterward at a place where it was safe. The dispute also extended to the allegedly forced conversion of Sabbatai Zevi, an Ottoman Jew from Smyrna. In reality, at the beginning of 1666, the Ottoman Sultan in Constantinople ordered Sabbatai, who had many followers and had claimed to be the long-awaited Jewish messiah, to be imprisoned. When Sabbatai was later taken to Adrianople, the Sultan's physician, a former Jew, advised him to convert to Islam. The following day he converted before the Sultan, who happily rewarded Sabbatai by conferring the title (Mahmed) Effendi, and appointing him as his doorkeeper with a high salary. A number of Sabbatai's followers also went over to Islam and about 300 families converted and were known as dönmeh (converts).[55] In Persia under the Safavid dynasty where Sunnis were converted to Shi'ism[56] and Jews were converted to Islam.[57] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_conversion#Early
Challenger, et al, Heavens No! War reparations Rule 150. A State responsible for violations of international humanitarian law is required to make full reparation for the loss or injury caused. War reparations are payments intended to cover damage or injury inflicted during a war. Generally, the term war reparations refers to money or goods changing hands, but not to the annexation of land. Making the defeated party pay a war indemnity is a common practice with a long history. (COMMENT) While the French, Polish, Dutch, Norwegian, and Belgian Resistance were subject to Article 68 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, they did not operate inside Germany. German had no claim to negotiate with the Allied Powers. During the period prior to 1994 and the establishment of the Peace Treaty between Jordan and Israel, the Arab Palestinian has no claim. The West Bank was sovereign Jordanian Territory. During the period prior to the Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979, The Gaza Strip was an Egyptian Military Governorship. Again, the Arab Palestinian has no claim. The Arab-Palestinian might owe Israel War Repatriations from 1949 through the present for all deaths, destruction, injuries and losses for every action taken outside the West Bank or Gaza Strip. Those action would not be a resistance effort in an occupied territory. Most Respectfully, R
Challenger; et al, They may not be able to return, but they could file a claim with the court. (COMMENT) No country, to include Israel, is going to allow the return of a threat to national security. Countries like the UK, Belgium, France and Germany (to name a few). Poor Sweden, it's hard to believe. Swedish police: 55 official no-go zones October 29, 2014 The Sweden Report Immigration "The Swedish police recently released a map of 55 areas where they publicly admit to having surrendered control to the criminal gangs. These areas have long had problems with mailmen, fire trucks and ambulances being attacked when trying to enter, which has led to them routinely requesting police escort. Now its the police being attacked outright. A new trend is also to map out police homes and families to intimidate and discourage policework, police say." AND Germanys Sharia No-Go Zones The Counter Jihad Report News ~ Resources ~ Activism To mark No Go Areas, that is to say law-free areas with high danger potential, is nothing unusual, Rüdiger Franz of Bonn, Germanys General Anzeiger (GA) newspaper wrote, as travel guide entries for cities such as Detroit, Istanbul, Johannesburg, or Mogadishu show. Considerable controversy, however, ensued after a language school posted an Internet No Go Area map of Bonn and environs, drawing ongoing, often unwelcome attention to the problems Germanys once serene former capital faces from newly arrived Muslim immigrants. The No Go map at the website of the Steinke Institut (SI) language schools Bonn branch first drew significant public interest at the conservative German website Politically Incorrect (PI) with a July 18, 2013, entry. Attention only grew in the following weeks with an unexpectedly large echo of about 50 Bonn residents contacting SI with approval, queries, and criticism, as an SI Internet statement at the beginning of September noted. It doesn't take a Rhodes Scholar to grasp the danger here. It is understood all over Europe. Other countries are going to attempt and avoid this mistake. Why shouldn't Israel? Most Respectfully, R
genetic research shows that Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews are not pure descendents of the ancient Judeans. we are a result of Judean and Gentile intermixing in the Roman & Greek Empires
according to every Orthodox Rabbi, the Galut is spiritual and only ends when Moshiach comes. it is offensive for you to confuse politics with religion
