Appreciate this article? +972 depends on your support.

Click here to help us keep going

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

Israel's housing policy for Arabs is designed to fail

Israel’s housing system is not ‘failing’ its Palestinian citizens. It is working exactly as it was intended: to minimize Arab lands in order to maximize Jewish communities.

The rubble of three houses of the Assaf family hours after they were demolished by the Israeli authorities, on April 15, 2015. Dahmash is the only unrecognised village in the center of Israel of Palestinians and Bedouins, located between Lod and Ramle. Oren Ziv / Activestills.org

The rubble of three houses of the Assaf family hours after they were demolished by the Israeli authorities, on April 15, 2015. Dahmash, located between Lod and Ramle, is the only unrecognized village in central Israel. Oren Ziv / Activestills.org

Half an hour north of Tel Aviv stand several hills offering a natural panoramic view of the bustling Arab towns of Taibeh and Tira, their congested neighborhoods, and their narrow roads and alleys. Surrounding the towns are the smaller and orderly Jewish villages and farming communities of Sha’ar Efraim, Sde Warburg, Ramat Hakovesh, and others. The hilltops used to be empty; now they are home to high-rise apartments of the new Jewish town of Tzur Yitzhak, along with Tzur Natan, Kokhav Yair and Tzur Yigal.

The view from those hills encapsulates Israel’s land policy toward the Palestinian communities in the state that survived after 1948. Although Taibeh and Tira are among the largest localities in the area (about 40,000 and 24,000 residents respectively), they are physically constrained by the sparse Jewish communities around them, whose populations are at most in the few hundreds or thousands. Many of the surrounding lands once belonged to Palestinians but were transferred to Jewish owners during the state’s formative years. The roads and highways around Taibeh and Tira further serve as barriers that prevent the towns from expanding.

This man-made landscape is not only the result of decades-old policies – it is an active process that continues to this day. Just last week, Israeli authorities demolished a home near Taibeh that belonged to a family of 11, which was built without a construction permit on land that was zoned for agricultural use. The Israeli tractors were accompanied by masked police forces that used stun grenades and “skunk” water to disperse and arrest protesting residents.

The following day, Haaretz reported that the attorney general approved recommendations to “increase enforcement of planning and construction laws,” which includes carrying out demolitions against illegal buildings and issuing fines against their inhabitants. Members of the Palestinian leadership in Israel connected these developments to Netanyahu’s call to enhance law enforcement in the Palestinian sector, a message he championed after last month’s shooting in Tel Aviv. The new plan amounts to harassment of the Palestinian community, the Palestinian leadership maintains.

Israeli police officers stand guard as the home of Hana al-Nakib and her four children is being demolished, in the city of Lod, February 10, 2015. The house was built with the help of family members and neighbours who donated money to help the single mother. The house was built on a family-owned land, but without permission from the Israeli authorities. Palestinian citizens of Israel can hardly attain building permits due to Israel's discriminative criterions. Oren Ziv / Activestills.org

Israeli police stand guard as the home of Hana al-Nakib and her four children is demolished in the city of Lod, February 10, 2015. Palestinian citizens of Israel can rarely obtain building permits due to discriminatory criterion. (Oren Ziv/Activestills.org)

Israeli authorities claim the demolitions are about applying the rule of law, saying that thousands of Palestinian citizens are refusing to follow planning procedures and abide by their local and regional master plans. What they do not mention is that those procedures and plans systemically ignore Palestinian citizens’ needs.

Out of over 40,000 construction tenders for new housing units published by the Israel Land Authority in 2014, only 1,844 units (4.6 percent) were in Palestinian towns. Out of 139 Palestinian localities included in Israel’s new national master plan, only 41 of them (29.4 percent) have been given updated plans. Palestinian couples still find that it can take years to acquire a building permit, making it difficult to secure a home by the time they start their new lives.

The state is well aware of the difficult circumstances faced by Palestinian citizens – because it deliberately created them. Combining land confiscations, bureaucratic intransigence, racist laws, and home demolitions, the state has fulfilled its goal of minimizing Arab lands for the purpose of maximizing Jewish lands.

Palestinian citizens make up 20 percent of Israel’s population, but their localities constitute only 3 to 3.5 percent of the state’s territory. No new Arab town has been built since Israel’s establishment, with the exception of seven impoverished townships that were created to concentrate half of the Naqab’s Bedouin citizens and dispossess them of their historic lands. In contrast, hundreds of urban and rural Jewish towns have rapidly proliferated and immediately received basic services – including settlements in the occupied territories.

The discrimination runs even deeper. Over 430 small Jewish towns in the North and South use admissions committees to bar Palestinian citizens from living among them, claiming they are “socially and culturally unsuitable” for the communities. Government funding for the Arab sector remains extremely unequal despite repeated plans to close economic gaps, which exacerbates Arab towns’ poor infrastructure. More alarmingly, dozens of unrecognized Bedouin villages in the Naqab like Umm al-Hiran, which the state has refused to grant legal status for decades, are slated to be destroyed in order to build new towns and farms exclusively for Jewish citizens.

Settlement construction in Gilo, January 21, 2010. (Photo: Activestills.org)

Settlement construction in Gilo, January 21, 2010. (Photo: Activestills.org)

Caught in legal limbo, it is unsurprising that thousands of Palestinian families choose to build their homes illegally and outside their towns’ designated spaces. For the state, the catch-22 plays entirely in its favor. It forces and intimidates the majority of Palestinian citizens to remain within the confines of their own communities, while creating an excuse to punish those who dare to bypass its discriminatory institutions. Targeted demolitions like last week’s near Taibeh – just like home demolitions in the Naqab, East Jerusalem, and the West Bank – are then used to set examples to the Palestinian community, ordering them to stay behind their demarcated spaces.

The problem, therefore, is not that Israel’s housing system is “failing” its Palestinian citizens. The system is working exactly as it was intended. Tzur Yitzhak, one of the Jewish communities on the hilltops between Taibeh and Tira, was only established in 2007 and already has nearly 3,500 residents in its towering apartments. The houses of Taibeh and Tira, meanwhile, remain exactly where they were a decade ago, kept at bay by the roads and gated communities. That same view can be found in countless spots across the country, revealing the scale to which Israel has worked to keep its Arabs separate from its Jews.

Newsletter banner

For additional original analysis and breaking news, visit +972 Magazine's Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. Our newsletter features a comprehensive round-up of the week's events. Sign up here.

View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • LEAVE A COMMENT

    * Required

    COMMENTS

    1. been there

      “Many of the surrounding lands once belonged to Palestinians but were transferred to Jewish owners during the state’s formative years” Not transferred! STOLEN!!!

      Reply to Comment
    2. Lauren

      As an Israeli citizen, I strongly protest Israel’s discriminatory policies against its own citizens. There’s a clear misuse of the term “democracy” here.

      Reply to Comment
    3. Mike Keren

      Are these policies worse than those that existing Syria,Lebanon, Iraq Etc for Jews.?
      Oh, I forgot, the Arab States are Jew Free Zones.

      Reply to Comment
      • Bruce Gould

        http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/non%20sequitur

        “..a statement (as a response) that does not follow logically from or is not clearly related to anything previously said”

        This is a website about human rights in Israel, so that’s what we’re talking about. The situation in Syria or North Korea or China is irrelevant.

        Reply to Comment
        • Farragut

          “We need to stop those Jews from cheating” – “But not only Jews cheat!” – “Don’t change the subject! We’re talking about the Jews.”

          Reply to Comment
        • Gustav

          Translation…

          What is done to Jews by Arabs is irrelevant.

          This is a website about what Israeli Jews do only and only about the bad things that those Jews do in response to bad things done to them by their enemies.

          We are not here to talk about bad things that Arabs do. Thanks for clearing that up, Bruce.

          Reply to Comment
          • Aussie Mark

            Israel constantly claims to be a “democracy” whereas the others don’t. True democracies don’t favour one group of its people over another based on race or religion.In any case you can’t justify human rights abuses on the basis that other counties may be worse. Its like a criminal telling the Judge he should be acquitted because others have committed worse crimes. So this type of excuse is essentially an admission of guilt

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            I love your self righteousness, Aussie…

            Did you know that in the second world war, Australia and it’s allies put naturalised German Jews who were citizens in detention camps for security reasons?

            Are you also aware that we are still in the midst of a 100 year old war which the Palestinian Arabs have been waging against us?

            So what is it that you are trying to say? You don’t think we have the same right to look after our security needs the same way that you did during your war? Or are you saying that democracy has it’s limits during war times? Because if it is the second, then I agree.

            Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            It’s a completely worn out and threadbare trick to redefine a 49-year illegal occupation/land grab as “we are at war” but even if that duplicitous premise is accepted Israel has blatantly violated many times over the basic tenets of international law governing belligerent occupations. So either way you’re full of it. But really, calling the resistance to an absolutely brutal 49-year illegal occupation that involves incessant land robbery by all sorts of shady means,* calling that whole business your being “at war,” is some amazing con job.

            * Almost all West Bank land deals for illegal settlements forged, investigation finds
            From straw men to cash-stuffed suitcases, new investigation reveals that 14 out 15 acquisitions by right wing firm of West Bank lands from Palestinians were forged.

            Chaim Levinson
            Feb 01, 2016
            http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.700794?v=CA9B56895C09E482F5705880F7F6DC7C
            – – –
            Gee, while “you” were “at war,” “you” found the time and opportunity to practice extensive real estate fraud. How about that? Nice little “war” you got going on there.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            You know Benny, you can pluck out your allegations endlessly about how evil we are and forget everything else. It is a neat trick to smear and throw mud. Endlessly. Throw enough mud without mentioning context and some of it sticks that is what people like you do.

            But at the end of the day my point to Aussie stands. Unless of course you claim that it was the epitome of democracy for your country and Australia to round up natuaralised citizens who were from enemy countries and put them in detention camps? Personally, I don’t think so. Yet I can see their rationale for doing it at the time. By the same token, I can see the rationale for many of the things we do. I see that war makes it necessary even for democracies to do things that otherwise would not be excusable.

            I know what your response will be now, Benny. You will now post an obfuscatingly long tirade listing, maybe SOME real but exaggerated list of examples of “evil deeds” that we do, all without context mixed in with lies. My response to it ought to be to yaaaaawwwwn. But I’ll say it again…. my above point stands no matter what BS you come up with.

            Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            What “context” do you want me to mention in regards to brazen real estate fraud?

            Why is Chaim Levinson’s article “a neat trick to smear and throw mud”?

            If “you” are “at war,” then why is rampant real estate fraud going on in the midst of this supposed “war” zone?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Read the article, Benny. This is an emotive one sided article by an author who adheres to your side of politics which as I said, espouses throwing mud endlessly knowing full well that some of it will stick.

            You wanna be more effective with people like me? Stop your emotive one sided clap trap and start criticizing both sides when necessary. Wanna concentrate just on Israel? We then cannot possibly take you seriously.

            And my point still stands…

            “plans systemically ignore Palestinian citizens’ needs.”

            The naturalised Jewish citizens of German origin in your country and other places like Australia had their needs ignored too in WW2, don’t you think, Benny? Or do you think they had an inate need to be put into detention camps?

            Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            Is not this just more “let’s be evenhanded shall we? While we gobble ever more land for another 49 years”?

            What exactly is emotive and one sided about the article? Please explain.

            Where’s the mud? Truth is mud? Mud is something personal and extraneous, meant to distract from the real issues. How is either Iraqi’s or Levinson’s article, then, mud? Can you explain yourself?

            What does WW2 have to do with the occupation?

            Bogus “war” equivalences aside, did Australians at the height of war fraudulently buy Japanese land with cash-stuffed suitcase switcheroos? Did Americans do the same with German land during the Battle of the Bulge? If they did, did they flagrantly get away with it when caught? With a wink and a nod? I’d really like to know.

            By the way, when did you criticize both sides? I missed that.

            The questions multiply.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            BEN:”Is not this just more “let’s be evenhanded shall we?”

            Suit yourself, Benny, you don’t wanna be a bit more even handed while still taking sides? Then be prepared to be ignored because of your self confessed bias.

            BEN:”While we gobble ever more land for another 49 years”? ”

            There you go again. If we would have been gobbling up land over 49 years, there would not be any Arabs left here because we would have ALL their land by now. And the lands that we DID take were not Arab owned lands. They are crown lands which were part of the British mandate which the two ethnic groups have been fighting for since 1947. The Arabs have been fighting for all the land (including the land that Israel is on) while we are fighting for part of the land. Which one of us has been more greedy, and which is less greedy?

            Tell your Arabs to sign a peace deal, agree on borders and neither of us would then grab lands.

            BEN:”What exactly is emotive and one sided about the article? Please explain.”

            Sigh. I already answered that. Here my example again. The only needs to consider in war are the needs of the ethnic group which fights a war against one?

            FROM THE ARTICLE:“plans systemically ignore Palestinian citizens’ needs.”

            The naturalised Jewish citizens of German origin in your country (your country Benny) and other places like Australia had their needs ignored too in WW2, don’t you think, Benny? Or do you think they had an inate need to be put into detention camps?

            BEN:”Where’s the mud? Truth is mud? Mud is something personal and extraneous, meant to distract from the real issues. How is either Iraqi’s or Levinson’s article, then, mud? Can you explain yourself?

            When a person says bad things about one side only, day in day out and forgets to mention the behavior of the so called victim group that is mud slinging, Benny. You should know because that is what you do too, day in day out.

            BEN:”What does WW2 have to do with the occupation?”

            Ah nuffin much (sarcasm) it is just a reminder to hypocrites like you (and that other guy to whom I was posting before you butted in) who both ignore the practices of your own countries when you people fight your wars against aggressors who threaten you lot.

            BEN:”Bogus “war” equivalences aside, did Australians at the height of war fraudulently buy Japanese land with cash-stuffed suitcase switcheroos?”

            Nope, they did worse things. They put their naturalised Jewish and non Jewish citizens who originated from enemy countries into detention camps.

            If we would do that, you’d be personally come over and try to lynch us.

            BEN:”Did Americans do the same with German land during the Battle of the Bulge? If they did, did they flagrantly get away with it when caught? With a wink and a nod? I’d really like to know.”

            Americans too did what the Aussies did. You guys put your own citizens indiscriminately into detention camps just because they were born Germans (even Jewish Germans), Italians or Japanese. Do you consider that a democratic act?

            Oh and after the war, the British executed traitors who propogated anti British propaganda on Radio. You people jailed such people and it wasn’t even during the war. It was AFTER the war. Were those acts democratic, Benny?

            BEN:”By the way, when did you criticize both sides? I missed that.”

            When you start discussing this topic like a decent human being with an open mind, you’d be surprised how critical I can be of us. In fact, even this way I never claimed that we are beyond criticism.

            But I’ll be damned if I will join you in your one sided tirade against us while you ignore or excuse all the bad behavior of the Arabs. I am not my own worst enemy. I will not help those (people like you Benny) whose dearest wish is to do your bit to destroy our country.

            BEN:”The questions multiply.”

            No Benny, they don’t. What is happening here is very clear. You people are trying your damnest to ‘character assassinate’ our country hoping that by doing so, you will help your Arabs to realize their wet dream of Israel’s destruction. You won’t succeed. You are wasting your time Benny.

            Reply to Comment
          • Ben

            Not a single sentence of this coheres into a halfway convincing argument. The bogus “war” equivalence floats all through it.

            The formula of ’67 lines with swaps, a shared arrangement for Jerusalem and an agreed upon symbolic solution to refugees–only in the most hysterical right wing imagination is this “Israel’s destruction.”

            But you just gotta have more. No matter the suffering and actual, not pretend risks to your security. You do nothing but heap contumely on the non-extremists. This is transparent. Bibi and Bennet reserve their greatest vituperation for the peace seeking realists and compromisers among the Palestinians. Anyone who is the least bit objective sees through this. Bibi is out there on video praising Im Tirtzu. Bibi is out there on video bragging contentedly to settlers about how he deliberately destroyed Oslo. His aim all along has been and still is to make Oslo a tool for Israeli expansionism:
            http://972mag.com/oslo-has-become-a-tool-for-israeli-expansionism-its-time-to-let-go/112254/

            “plans systemically ignore Palestinian citizens’ needs.”

            This is “emotive”? What are you talking about? Let me get this straight. You claim that seven decades ago Australians mistreated naturalized Germans, Jews included. THIS is your justification for mistreating occupied Palestinians today? Are you kidding me? How bankrupt is that?

            “You wanna be more effective with people like me?”

            I don’t. Lost cause. Which is why I know that only external pressure will change things for the better.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            BEN:”The formula of ’67 lines with swaps, a shared arrangement for Jerusalem and an agreed upon symbolic solution to refugees–only in the most hysterical right wing imagination is this “Israel’s destruction.”

            As usual, Benny looks one in the eye and lies without flinching.

            The Palestinians already rejected the above solution TWICE!!!!

            First in 2000 when Ehud Barak offered it and we got a murderous intifada in response and the Durban lynch mob.

            Then Ehud Olmert offered it and Abbas just ignored it.

            …and Benny, don’t bother trotting out your usual fairy tales from the likes of Robert Malley’s contradictory take on it because he grew up in a household which was an extreme leftist activist one. In fact, his father was a personal friend of Arafat.

            None other than Bill Clinton, Dennis Ross, Condi Rice and others said what I say in this post. In fact, I am saying what THEY said.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            BEN:”This is “emotive”? What are you talking about? Let me get this straight. You claim that seven decades ago Australians mistreated naturalized Germans, Jews included. THIS is your justification for mistreating occupied Palestinians today? Are you kidding me? How bankrupt is that?”

            This is typical of Benny. This is how he spins his propaganda.

            He butts into my conversation by post with Aussie Mark in which I responded to his claim about democracies. Then along comes Benny and twists what I said and why I said it.

            And the rest of his post is full of lies, distortions and false claims about the type of peace deal which his Palestinian Arabs are willing to accept.

            It really is neat. He banks on the fact that ordinary people are just not interested in Middle East history enough. And based on that belief he just continually slings and hurls mud at my country and pretends that the Palestinian Arabs are just innocent victims who mind their own business and wouldn’t harm a fly yet we abuse them for no reason whatsoever. Sick!

            Reply to Comment
          • TB7

            This is Gustav’s trick.

            1.) Divert from Jewish atrocities and divert to astrocities agains Jews or blame the party that doesn’t accept “solutions” which are based on violations of their international rights, their human rights and their defensive right to self determination.
            2.) Divert from the contradiction between wanting peace on the one hand while illegaly colonializing it on the other and dispossesing the members of the opposite party while accusing them of being “greedy”, and fighting for it “all”, allthough they allready posessed it, simply by being citizens of Palestine pre 1948.
            3.) Invent history and obscure real land ownership. Wether on a national scale by claiming that Palestine was “crown lands” (allthough Palestine was only under British guardianship and never annexed by Britain) OR on a private level.

            “The land and its ownership [in 1945]”

            Arabs: 48,5%
            Jews: 5,67%
            Public: 5,67%

            The rest was uncultivable land of the Bersheeba district [You know, the desert that Jews made bloom … lmao.]

            Source: Village Statistics of 1945: A Classification of Land and Area ownership in Palestine (published by the PALESTINE Government in 1945):
            http://www.palestineremembered.com/download/VillageStatistics/4-The%20Land%20And%20Its%20Ownership/Page-019.jpg

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            TB7:1.) Divert from Jewish atrocities and divert to astrocities agains Jews”

            And this is your trick, TB7 (AKA Benny)…

            Your trick is to ignore atrocities against Jews, yes by Arabs, and chastise me or anyone else who brings it up by saying that we are not here to talk about bad things that Arabs do. We are only here for throwing mud at Israel.

            TB7:”or blame the party that doesn’t accept “solutions” which are based on violations of their international rights, their human rights and their defensive right to self determination.”

            Now for what I really say…

            I say, that if the Arabs life under Israeli rule would really be as terrible and unbearable as TB7/Benny claims, then they would be willing to sign a peace deal which would contain some of Israel’s terms too and not just insist that Israel has to surrender unconditionally. They might not like the idea but they would do it because they would get their own state and self determination.

            TB7:”2.) Divert from the contradiction between wanting peace on the one hand while illegaly colonializing it on the other hand….”

            Now TB7 is talking gibberish. I don’t even know what he is saying. I doubt that he does either. He threw in the word “colonizing” because that is just part of his propaganda rhetoric. I mean, how does one “colonize peace”? LFMAO.

            TB7:”….and dispossesing the members of the opposite party”

            You mean the “settlements”? Some of which were built on lands which Jews owned prior to 1948 (like Gush Etzion) before it was overrun by the Arab legion and Palestinian irregulars who then massacred Jewish prisoners of war with their hands tied behind their backs?

            TB7:”while accusing them of being “greedy”, and fighting for it “all”, allthough they allready posessed it, simply by being citizens of Palestine pre 1948.”

            They posessed SOME of the land before 1948. Not all of it. Some of the land was privately owned. Some was privately owned. Most of the land was crown land.

            But spot the difference. It is a matter of historical record that in 1947, Jews accepted the two state salution. The Arabs rejected it and made war because they wanted it all. They didn’t recognize Jewish rights. Yes, that’s greed.

            TB7:”3.) Invent history”

            He is talking about himself again.

            TB7:”and obscure real land ownership. Wether on a national scale by claiming that Palestine was “crown lands”

            He can’t even utter one sentence without distorting what I really say. I said both Jews and Arabs owned land privately but most of the land WAS crown land. That’s true of most countries even today. And it was particularly true of Palestine which was a neglected backwater of the Ottoman empire before we Jews started returning to it around the mid 1800s and joined our brothers who never left. There were only around 350,000 people in Palestine around the 1850s.

            TB7:”(allthough Palestine was only under British guardianship and never annexed by Britain) OR on a private level.”

            So?! And before that, it was part of the Ottoman empire for hundreds of years. It wasn’t sovereign Arab land.

            And the terms that guardianship included the idea of dividing the land between Jews and Arabs.

            TB7:“The land and its ownership [in 1945]”

            Arabs: 48,5%
            Jews: 5,67%
            Public: 5,67%

            Utter BS and fabrication by a Pro Palestinian propaganda site. How could Arabs own 48,5% of the land in 1948 if they had less than 350,000 people living there in the mid 1850s? Most of the Arabs were poor Felahin, some of them were immigrant workers who came in later in response to economic opportunities that were created by the Jews who brought in capital and created enterprise.

            Today, we have over 10million people living in the same area yet most of the lands are still crown lands.

            TB7:”The rest was uncultivable land of the Bersheeba district [You know, the desert that Jews made bloom … lmao.]”

            You mean we didn’t make some uninhabitable swamp lands bloom? You obviously haven’t read about the history of Petach Tikva and other similar places. Google it.

            TB7:”Source: Village Statistics of 1945: A Classification of Land and Area ownership in Palestine (published by the PALESTINE Government in 1945):
            http://www.palestineremembered.com/download/VillageStatistics/4-The%20Land%20And%20Its%20Ownership/Page-019.jpg

            Utter BS. The site doesn’t even identify itself. But whatever the site is. The statistics it quotes are from the 1001 Arabian nights. LOL.

            Reply to Comment
          • TB7

            Gustav: “And this is your trick, TB7 (AKA Benny)…

            Your trick is to ignore atrocities against Jews, yes by Arabs …”

            Two more Gustav tricks: Accusing others of commenting under multiple names and telling lies about my position two distract from his own. I never denied the expulsion of Jews by Arabs, but he denies the expulsion of Arabs by Jews while justifying that they are kept expelled.

            Gustav: “… and not just insist that Israel has to surrender unconditionally.”

            Surrender to what, Gustav? International and human rights law?

            Gustav: “I mean, how does one “colonize peace”?”

            Another trick from Gustav: Playing stupid.

            Gustav: “You mean the “settlements”?

            No, I mean Israel’s illegal settlements in occupied Palestine.

            Gustav: “Some of which were built on lands which Jews owned prior to 1948 (like Gush Etzion) before it was overrun by the Arab legion and Palestinian irregulars who then massacred Jewish prisoners of war with their hands tied behind their backs?”

            Another double standard, cause you don’t support Arabs to return or immigrate to Israel and build on land on which Arabs lived prior to 1948 before they were overrun by Jewish irregulars and terrorist organisation who massacred Arabs.

            Gustav: “They posessed SOME of the land before 1948. Not all of it.”

            I wasn’t talking about private ownership, Gustav, but national ownership. Do you want to argue that the US doesn’t belong to all of its citizens? And that they have the right to self determination by majority ruling?

            Gustav: It is a matter of historical record that in 1947, Jews accepted the two state salution. The Arabs rejected it and made war because they wanted it all.””

            It is a matter of historical record, that this was never the real Jewish Agency’s plan and that the majority of the citizens of Palestine rejected the plan, because they wanted the independence of Palestine. It was not them who needed acquire any territory of Palestine, especially not by war.

            Gustav: “They didn’t recognize Jewish rights.”

            What are “Jewish rights”, Gustav? Do Palestinian Arabs in Israel also have “Arab rights” and the right to create a state within Israel or is this just another one of your double standards?

            Gustav: “Yes, that’s greed.”

            No, that’s called right to self determination by majority ruling. Greed is to acquire land by war, illegal dispossession and illegal settlements.

            Gustav: “He can’t even utter one sentence without distorting what I really say. I said both Jews and Arabs owned land privately but most of the land WAS crown land.”

            Another trick from Gustav: Accuse others of doing what he’s been accused of doing. And no, less than 6% was public land and the term “crown land” is misleading since it didn’t belong to any crown.

            Gustav: “And the terms that guardianship included the idea of dividing the land between Jews and Arabs.”

            No, not dividing the land, but facillitating Jewish immigration and close settlements in Palestine while ensuring the rights of others. In 1939 the mandatory declared that the national home for Jews was established. See, British White Paper 1939.

            Gustav: “Utter BS and fabrication by a Pro Palestinian propaganda site.”

            Nope. A screen shot of a commented version of the “Village Statistics, 1945″ which was a joint survey work prepared by the Government Office of Statistics and the Department of Lands of the British Mandate Government for the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry on Palestine which acted in early 1946.”
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Statistics,_1945

            “How could Arabs own 48,5% of the land in 1948 …”

            This has to do with Ottoman land law and how ownership is defined, privately, collectivly, by cultivation and as grazing rights, etc.

            Gustav: “You mean we didn’t make some uninhabitable swamp lands bloom?”

            Another trick from Gustav: Disguising his straw man arguments as rhetorical questions to insinuate that I advocate a position which is either immoral or can be easily refuted.

            Reply to Comment
    4. maya

      Granted that there are inequalities between Arabs and Jews in Israel in allocation of public funds for e.g., planning and infrastructure; It is odd that Amjad Iraqi chooses to misrepresent the facts in this piece. More than 90% of Israelis, Arabs and Jews, live in towns and cities, and the Jewish localities are far more densely populated than the Arab ones. In other words, Jewish localities, as a rule, have far less land per inhabitant than Arab ones. The average Israeli Jew hardly even dream about life in place so little densely populated as the Arab towns Tira and Taibeh mentioned in the piece.
      Let us look at some numbers. The localities leading in density of population in Israel are: Bnei Brak (24,200 inhabitants per Square km.), Givataym (17,600), Bat Yam (15,600), Kiryat Motzkin (10,300), Holon (9,900) and Ramat Gan (9,200). None of these municipalities is Arab. All of them are inhabited predominantly if not entirely by Jews. How do these figures compare with the Arab towns that Iraqi laments their discrimination? Well, density of population in Taibeh is 2,100 inhabitants per square km, and in Tira 2,000.

      Like Iraqi, I don’t like “gated communities”, and I think that it is not a secret that in some areas, e.g., in Galilee and near to the Green Line, the State encourages Jewish citizens to move there, also for national-strategic-security reasons – for example to prevent secessionist claims and hostile regions within the country, or claims to these lands by Palestinians for their state etc. This is an old “logic” of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that both local sides and some international actors have regrettably adopted: if you physically sit on a piece of land, then your political claim to it stronger.

      But what are the implications of these “gated communities” for discrimination against Arab/Palestinian citizens of Israel? Iraqi fails to mention that the population of these communities is a very small minority of Israelis. That the overwhelming majority of Israeli-Jews do not live in such communities, but in neighbourhoods, towns and cities where properties are sold and bought on the market, where Arab/Palestinian citizens indeed purchase and rent properties too. Finally, Iraqi fails to clarify that even for “gated communities” it is against the law to reject someone because s/he is Arab. There is no formal discrimination against Arabs in this context. It will be naïve to think that there is no informal discrimination – against Arabs, as well as against many Jews that the members of such communities do not want as their close neighbours.

      Reply to Comment
      • TB7

        “Let us look at some numbers.”

        Why don’t give us the numbers of the Jewish and nonjewish citizens of Israel and on how many square km both live and de facto allowed to build new houses?

        “But what are the implications of these “gated communities” for discrimination against Arab/Palestinian citizens of Israel?”

        What country would we be talking about, if it allowed its citizens to prevent Jews from moving into other communities, because their are “socially incompatible”?

        Reply to Comment
        • Gustav

          Boring. Look at Mya’s post above.

          Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            TB7:”while accusing them of being “greedy”, and fighting for it “all”, allthough they allready posessed it, simply by being citizens of Palestine pre 1948.”

            Presumably what TB7 is trying to say here that by Jews being citizens of Palestine, which is true, we should have been satisfied with staying citizens of Palestine as a minority under Arab rule instead of opting for partition in line with the recommendations of the UN.

            There is only one response I can give to that. A big fat raspberry. No thanks. For 2000 years we suffered discrimination, hatred and periodic pogroms as minorities. No thanks. No more. We had enough of that.

            Reply to Comment
          • TB7

            Maya tries to distract from this:

            “Palestinian citizens make up 20 percent of Israel’s population, but their localities constitute only 3 to 3.5 percent of the state’s territory.”

            Gustav: “Presumably what TB7 is trying to say here that by Jews being citizens of Palestine, which is true, we should have been satisfied with staying citizens of Palestine as a minority under Arab rule instead of opting for partition in line with the recommendations of the UN.”

            No, what I’m trying to say is that foreigners should never immigrate into a country, if they don’t intend to peacefully live under majority ruling. So what was “your” intentition, Gustav, since you claim to speak for all Jews and even for the ones who were living under majority ruling before mandate times?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Immigrate to a country?

            First of all, Palestine wasn’t a sovereign Arab country for over 1000 years.

            Second of all Palestine wasn’t a sovereign country in 1947. It became a trusteeship when Britain took over in the early 20th century. And one of the stated mission of that trusteeship was to create a homeland for the Jewish people.

            Third of all, around the mid 1800s when we returned and joined our brothers who never left, Palestine was part of the Ottoman empire. Certainly not a sovereign country or even a trusteeship.

            Fourth of all, there were no more than 350,000 people in Palestine in the mid 1800s. Some of them were Jewish (admittedly a minority).

            Fifth of all, we have a historical connection to this land going back 4000 years.

            But we had no right to immigrate here? You are out of your cotton pickin’ biased little mind, TB7.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Last but not least…

            There was nothing sacrosanct about the boundaries of Palestine or even any other trusteeship or country.

            Boundaries of such entities have been drawn and redrawn in many places throughout history in order to suit prevailing conditions.

            Here are just a few examples…

            Jordan used to be part of Palestine till 1929. It was known as Eastern Palestine. Yet the Brits carved it off and gave it to the Arabs in 1929. You will never hear TB7 jumping up and down protesting that.

            Other examples…

            Around the same time in the Indian subcontinent. 12% of the population, Muslims, were allowed to carve off part of India and establish their own country which is now known as Pakistan.

            Another example in very recen history…

            Kosovo where Muslims again peeled off from Yugoslavia and establish their own country.

            No one seems to be jumping up and down about those other partitions, least of all Muslims. They all reserve their outrage about Jews doing the same. That’s what we are up against. Hate, violence and hypocrisy perpetrated by Arab Muslims against Jews who they insist HAVE TO stay an oppressed minority amongst them. We beg to differ!!!

            Reply to Comment
          • TB7

            Gustav: “Immigrate to a country?”

            Yes, Gustav. Palestine was a state under mandate and had its own nationality (and immigration) law.

            Gustave “But we had no right to immigrate here?”

            I wrote that foreigners should never immigrate into a country, if they don’t intend to peacefully live under majority ruling.

            But since you ask your question: Do Palestinian Arabs have a right to immigrate or return to the territory which is called “Israel”? And why doesn’t Israel recognize Kosovo? And how is Kosovo’s housing policy towards its nonmuslim minority?

            Reply to Comment
          • Whonoze

            1. “Yes, Gustav. Palestine was a state under mandate and had its own nationality (and immigration) law.”

            QUESTION

            What is the source of that yet another foolish claim, moron?

            2. “I wrote that foreigners should never immigrate into a country, if they don’t intend to peacefully live under majority ruling.”

            “But since you ask your question: Do Palestinian Arabs have a right to immigrate or return to the territory which is called “Israel”?”

            QUESTION

            Is Israel “a country” or “the territory which is called “Israel”?

            Are you really that dense and confused to understand YOUR own logic and be consistent in it?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Gustav:“But we had no right to immigrate here?”

            TB7:”I wrote that foreigners should never immigrate into a country, if they don’t intend to peacefully live under majority ruling.”

            Hold on there buddy. When Jews started returning to our ancestral homeland and joined our brothers who already lived there, the rulers were the Ottoman Turks, not the Arabs. In fact, the province of Palestine had no more than 350,000 inhabitants who were there in 1850? So what majority rulers are you talking about? The only answer is the Ottoman Turks and they obviously had no problems with our return otherwise they would have stopped us.

            TB7:”But since you ask your question: Do Palestinian Arabs have a right to immigrate or return to the territory which is called “Israel”? And why doesn’t Israel recognize Kosovo? And how is Kosovo’s housing policy towards its nonmuslim minority?”

            We are a sovereign country and we have the right not to allow in immigrants whose express aim is to overthrow the previling system.

            See the difference between the two? The Turks and Brits who ruled Palestine allowed most Jews in. Had they not allowed us in, we would not be here. End of story.

            What exactly is your point, TB7? That we should have just been nice to the roughly 300,000 Arabs (give or take) who lived in Palestine at the time and just stay away, coz they claimed that the country is theirs? Ditto once we were there in greater numbers? What do you think the world is? A sunday school picnic? Is that how Arabs behave with others?

            In any case, why exactly do you think the two state solution is Sooooooo unjust? Do you think the Arab peoples were not granted enough land in the Middle East and North Africa? They miss having tiny little Israel which represents 0.5% of the total lands under Arab ownership? The word greed comes to mind!

            Reply to Comment
          • TB7

            Gustav: “So what majority rulers are you talking about?

            I wrote that foreigners should never immigrate into a country, if they don’t intend to peacefully live under majority RULING, not rulers. Do you want to claim that immigrating Jews were never willing to live under majority ruling in Palestine?

            Gustav: “We are a sovereign country and we have the right not to allow in immigrants whose express aim is to overthrow the previling system.”

            Where’s your proof for this expressed aim? It’s just a racist incitement from your side. You just claim that every Palestinian refugee simply by being Palestinian has this aim. You don’t even consider the possibility that anyone was just interested to return home. The only ones who had an express aim to take over a country where Zionists. So according to your reasoning the Palestinians always had the right to prevent an immigration which was enforced upon them.

            Gustav: “See the difference between the two? The Turks and Brits who ruled Palestine allowed most Jews in.”

            Here’s the difference between the Turks and the Brits. The immigration policy of the Ottomans was not violating the fundamental rights of the inhabitants of their empire. But the British empire did the opposit as Palestine was never part of their empire.

            Gustav: “What exactly is your point, TB7? That we should have just been nice to the roughly 300,000 Arabs (give or take) who lived in Palestine at the time and just stay away, coz they claimed that the country is theirs?”

            ROFL. In 1923 it was 600,000 and in 1947 even 1,200,000 again, Palestine belonged to all of its legal citizens whether they were Arabs or Jews.

            Gustav: “In any case, why exactly do you think the two state solution is Sooooooo unjust?”

            I don’t think that any solution is unjust as long it is mutual and not enforced. But it never was and a party which can enforce conditions unto the other will never be interested in a mutual and just solution.

            Gustav: “Do you think the Arab peoples were not granted enough land in the Middle East and North Africa?”

            It’s not about the number of countries, but about the right to self determination of the inhabitants within a country.

            So why doesn’t Israel recognize Kosovo? Don’t you think that this is a perfect demonstration of Israel’s double standards?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            TB7:”I wrote that foreigners should never immigrate into a country, if they don’t intend to peacefully live under majority RULING, not rulers.”

            But we did want to live peacefully with them in a Jewish majority country.

            The UN proposal, Resolution 181, envisaged exactly that. The partition of Palestine into two countries, one Jewish one Arab. Both of those countries would have had BOTH Jewish and Arab citizens but one country was to be a Jewish majority state, the other an Arab majority state.

            We accepted. The Arabs rejected it. According to you, the UN recommendation was ILLEGAL. Are you saying the UN makes illegal recommendations?!

            No, raelly!!! In all seriousness, I would like you to answer that question if you have it in you to answer it, TB7.

            TB7:”Do you want to claim that immigrating Jews were never willing to live under majority ruling in Palestine?”

            See my answer above.

            Gustav: “We are a sovereign country and we have the right not to allow in immigrants whose express aim is to overthrow the previling system.”

            TB7:”Where’s your proof for this expressed aim? It’s just a racist incitement from your side.”

            OK, you know very well I already answered this question. It is becoming obvious to me what you are trying to do TB7. You are trying to bore me and everyone else to death by repeating and making me repeat everything many times over.

            But you won’t succeed. You are patient? I am patient too. So keep on doing your schtick and we will see who will get sick of this at the end…

            My answer again: If a group of people declare war on another group of people, then each side treats ALL the members of the other group as an enemy.

            Or are you claiming that the Western democracies allowed Germans and Japanese to immigrate to America during the war? Or even after the war in very large numbers (in their millions)? The whole idea is laughable. You are making a fool of yourself by laboring this idea, TB7.

            TO BE CONTINUED…

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST….

            TB7:”Here’s the difference between the Turks and the Brits. The immigration policy of the Ottomans was not violating the fundamental rights of the inhabitants of their empire. But the British empire did the opposit as Palestine was never part of their empire.”

            So you admit that the Ottoman Turks had the right to allow the Jews to return to our ancestral homeland. At least we are making progress…

            But you reject Britains right to do the same? On what grounds?! Britain had the trusteeship initially from the League of Nations and subsequently from the UN.

            And guess what part of that trusteeship involved? It involved creating a homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine. Yet you are saying that Britain had no right to let Jews in? How does that add up?

            Gustav: “What exactly is your point, TB7? That we should have just been nice to the roughly 300,000 Arabs (give or take) who lived in Palestine at the time and just stay away, coz they claimed that the country is theirs?”

            TB7:”ROFL. In 1923 it was 600,000 and in 1947 even 1,200,000 again, Palestine belonged to all of its legal citizens whether they were Arabs or Jews.”

            You can ROFL all you like buddy but by your own admission, the Palestine belonged to the Jews too, not just to the Arabs. So there is more than one form of SHARING…

            1. Live together in the same state with Jews as a persecuted an abused minority as has been the case for nearly 2000 years. Which is what you insist on… OR…

            2. Divide the country into two so that we could be a majority in one of the parts and where we could stop others from persecuting and abusing us.

            Guess which model we prefer, TB7?

            TO BE CONTINUED….

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Gustav: “In any case, why exactly do you think the two state solution is Sooooooo unjust?”

            TB7:”I don’t think that any solution is unjust as long it is mutual and not enforced. But it never was and a party which can enforce conditions unto the other will never be interested in a mutual and just solution.”

            Excuse me? Are you listening to yourself?

            The Jews in 1947 wanted to partition the land into two. Sigh, I’ll repeat it again. One with a Jewish majority, the other with an Arab majority. Your claim is that since the Arabs didn’t want that, that’s enforcing something?

            Ok. What the Arabs wanted was to have ONLY ONE country in which they would be the majority and in which they could continue old habits of oppressing their Jewish minority. We on the other hand DID NOT WANT THAT!

            So tell me TB7, why have they the right to enforce what THEY want? As opposed to us enforcing what we want, particularly if even the UN agreed with us?

            See why I claim that you suffer from double standard, TB7?!

            Gustav: “Do you think the Arab peoples were not granted enough land in the Middle East and North Africa?”

            TB7:”It’s not about the number of countries, but about the right to self determination of the inhabitants within a country.”

            Yea, the Arabs should have 23 countries in which they have self determination, while we Jews should have zero. In other words according to racists like you TB7, Jews have no right to self determination. I got your number…

            TB7:”So why doesn’t Israel recognize Kosovo? Don’t you think that this is a perfect demonstration of Israel’s double standards?”

            Does Kosovo recognize Israel?

            By the way, you still didn’t answer my questions about…

            1. Pakistan

            2. Eastern Palestine (Jordan)

            3. Kosovo.

            In all of the above, a minority Muslim population seceded or were partitioned off from existing countries. Given your logic that the country of Israel is illegal for having come into existence in a similar way as the above three countries, are you willing to clearly state that …

            1. Pakistan is an illegal country which should not exist. It should bevpart of India.

            2. Jordan is an illegal country which should not exist. It should be part of Palestine.

            3. Kosovo is an illegal country which should not exist. It should be part of Serbia.

            Hey, I disagree and that makes me consistent. You on the other hand seem to set Israel apart and you claim that only Israel is illegal. That makes you a hypocrite. But you are welcome to correct me if I misinterpret what you say. On the other hand, if you don’t respond again, I will take your silence as confirmation that my claim is correct.

            Reply to Comment
          • tb7

            Gustav: “But we did want to live peacefully with them in a Jewish majority country.”

            You avoided answering the question, if immigrating Jews were never willing to live under majority ruling in Palestine. I guess that you believe that they weren’t, but don’t want to admit this.

            How peacefully did Jewish terrorist and separatists acquire a territory for a country and became a majority in it, since Jewish citizens of Palestine were not only a significant minority within the territory which is called “Israel” today, but even a slight minority in the territory for the state for the Jews (which didn’t include Jerusalem and its Jews) according to partition plan?

            Gustav: “The UN proposal, Resolution 181, envisaged exactly that.”

            No, that’s not what the UN proposal envisaged. First of all Jews (and especially Jewish citizens of Palestine) were not a majority in the territory for the Jews which included the Bedouins ()whose number were largely underestimated according to the UN subcommitee Nr. 2) and excluded Jerusalem and its Jews. Secondly, the partion plan envisaged that all citizens of Palestine will become citizens of the newly created states. So the state for the Jews would have been a Jewish minority state from the get go.

            Gustav: “We accepted.”

            Rofl. ‘Your’ own historians proved that this was only an intermediary step for future expansion according to the chairman of the Jewish Agency and that it was even secretely collaborating with Jordan to split up Palestine. It’s no suprise how much territory which was not proposed to be inside the state for the Jews ‘you’ allready had occupied when it was proclaimed according to ‘your’ own words to the Security Council: “Jaffa; Northwestern Galilee, including Acre, Zib, Base, and the Jewish settlements up to the Lebanese frontier; a strip of territory alongside the road from Hilda to Jerusalem; almost all of new Jerusalem; and of the Jewish quarter within the walls of the Old City of Jerusalem.” These were all territories outside the state of Israel according to ‘your’ own words!

            So tell us Gustav, when did ‘you’, King of all Jews who speaks for all Jews ever were satisfied with any partition plan regarding the facts ‘you’ are still making on the grounds? Rofl.

            Gustav: “Are you saying the UN makes illegal recommendations?!”

            The proposal within the UNSCOP to refer the same question to the International Court of Justice was rejected by simple majority and in fact only by one deciding vote. And it is know amongst the then members of the General Assembly how the US rigged the voting for resolution 181 and how many times the voting was delayed to make sure that the result was ‘acceptable’. It was even called an “US” not an UN resolution amongst some members. And is out of question that BECAUSE of the principles of the right to self determination and territorial integrity enshrined in the charter of the UN the only people who had the right to decide on the future of Palestine were its citizens. But its no surprise that the UN rejected also a proposal to allow for a Palestinian referendum, not only because Zionists had a problem with the democratic principile of majority ruling as long as Jews were a minority.

            Gustav: “If a group of people declare war on another group of people, then each side treats ALL the members of the other group as an enemy.”

            So you lied that there is an expressed aim to overthrow the prevailing system amongst Palestinians who wish to return. Does Israel considers its Arab citizens to be enemies, too?

            And do you consider the Balfour Declaration; the mandate for Palestine; the Zionist expressed aim to create a Jewish state in Palestine; the acception of a proposal to partition a state without the consent of its majority; the proclamation of the state of Israel despite a Council’s resolution in April 1948 to abstain from proclamating states pending further considerations of the future goverment of Palestine to be a “declaration of war”?

            Gustav: “So you admit that the Ottoman Turks had the right to allow the Jews to return to our ancestral homeland.”

            Gustav, just quit your propaganda nonsense “allow the Jews to return to our ancestral homeland”, if you deny the same to Palestinian Arabs who were actually living there.

            The Ottomans had the right to allow or to deny the immigration of anyone.

            Gustav: “But you reject Britains right to do the same? On what grounds?! ”

            Palestine was never a part of Great Britain. So what rights had Great Britain to declare that it will help a group of foreigners to immigrate into a country which was not Great Britain?

            Gustav: “Britain had the trusteeship initially from the League of Nations and subsequently from the UN.”

            I know, it’s a colonial crime and perversion of the mandate system regarding class A mandates and its aim to help people to govern themselves. (Compare how quickly that was implemented in former Ottoman territories mandated by France). When the Palestinian Arab’s delegates confronted the future mandatory with this, the simple answer was that the independence of Palestine had to be postponed, because of the promises, Great Britain made to Zionists. Now you make think that this is right, because its good for the Jews, you claim to speak for. But it was not only a blatant denial of the right of self determination, but also of the right to select the mandatory. And when the UN was established, the mandatory had allready stopped Jewish immigration and restricted Jewish purchase of land, because even the mandate (article 6) only allowed to facilitate Jewish immigration and settlements under certain conditions and only while ensuring the rights of the Nonjewish communities.

            Gustav: “It involved creating a homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine.”

            That was allready accomplished in 1939 according to the mandatory’s white papers of the same year.

            Gustav: “… by your own admission, the Palestine belonged to the Jews too, not just to the Arabs …”

            To the the citizens of Palestine, not to Jews or Arabs as such.

            Gustav: “Guess which model we prefer, TB7?”

            I know which model you prefer, Gustav, King of Jews who claims to speak for all Jews:

            3. Acquire territory of Palestine by war and become and maintain to be a majority by direct or post facto expulsion of its Nonjewish majority.

            Gustav: “The Jews in 1947 wanted to partition the land into two.”

            You are just making my case. The Jews wanted this and the Jews wanted that. It was without consent of the majority of the citizens of Palestine. But how many Jewish natives of Palestine even wanted partition or the mandate?

            Gustav: “What the Arabs wanted was to have ONLY ONE country in which they would be the majority …”

            Rofl. They only wanted the independence of the country in which they allready were a majority.

            Gustav: “… and in which they could continue old habits of oppressing their Jewish minority.”

            The dhimmi status was abandoned in the Ottoman empire long ago and the co-existence between Arabs and Jews in Palestine was undermined after the publication of the Balfour declaration of war on behalf of Zionists who even asked for the reconstitution of Palestine as “the” Jewish national home.

            Gustav: “So tell me TB7, why have they the right to enforce what THEY want?”

            The Palestinian Arabs didn’t need to enforce anything. Neither the acquisition of territory, nor becoming a majority in it.

            Gustav: “Yea, the Arabs should …”

            Again, it’s not about the number of countries, but about the right to self determination of the inhabitants within a country.

            Gustav: “Does Kosovo recognize Israel?”

            Sure, that’s why the Kosovarians went to Israel to ask them to recognize Kosovo.

            Gustav: “By the way, you still didn’t answer my questions about…
            1. Pakistan
            2. Eastern Palestine (Jordan)
            3. Kosovo.”

            I answered this many times, but you choose to ignore this. And the fact that you highlight that Muslims are affected in these cases is just another demontration of your blatant racism.

            1.) Did India oppose Britain’s partition?
            2.) This was neither a secession, nor based on a partition. Jordan was not a part of Palestine, but only technically put under the mandate for Palestine. But most official documents referred to them as if they were two separate mandates. Your term “Eastern Palestine” is a term that only Zionist expansionists use.
            3.) This was not based on partition either. The question which arises is, if one can make a moral case for secession, if the fundamental rights of those who wish to seced are fundamentally violated. For example if the Goverment makes them live under martial law (like Israel made its Arabs live until 1966).

            Anyway, this case can’t be even compared to Israel’s case, cause the people who wanted to secede were even a minority in the territory which only this minority wanted to secede. The citizens of their newly created state are not even all considered to be nationals of this state and the real majority was expelled, either directly or post facto.

            Gustav: “On the other hand, if you don’t respond again, I will take your silence as confirmation that my claim is correct.”

            Ok. Then I will do the same from now on, too. Especially regarding all the questions you don’t want to answer, because I think that they expose your double standard, racism or even supremacism. Be my guest.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Ok Benny, oops TB7, let’s just start with debunking your first lie…

            TB7:”The dhimmi status was abandoned in the Ottoman empire long ago and the co-existence between Arabs and Jews in Palestine was undermined after the publication of the Balfour declaration of war on behalf of Zionists who even asked for the reconstitution of Palestine as “the” Jewish national home.”

            But here is what the reality was for Jews in Palestine. Read an article written in 1854 by none other than Karl Marx about the Jews of Jerusalem circa 1854. Note, that was way before Herzl published his Zionist manifesto. The article clearly outlines the wretched conditions of the Jews of Jerusalem and how they were oppressed by Muslims. Here, read it for yourself, TB7…

            https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1854/03/28.htm

            “The sedentary population of Jerusalem numbers about 15,500 souls, of whom 4,000 are Mussulmans and 8,000 Jews. The Mussulmans, forming about a fourth part of the whole, and consisting of Turks, Arabs and Moors, are, of course, the masters in every respect, as they are in no way affected with the weakness of their Government at Constantinople. Nothing equals the misery and the sufferings of the Jews at Jerusalem, inhabiting the most filthy quarter of the town, called hareth-el-yahoud, the quarter of dirt, between the Zion and the Moriah, where their synagogues are situated – the constant objects of Mussulman oppression and intolerance”

            I can’t wait to see what lies you’ll come up with to explain away the above.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            CONTINUED FROM BEFORE…

            Gustav: “But we did want to live peacefully with them in a Jewish majority country.”

            TB7:”You avoided answering the question, if immigrating Jews were never willing to live under majority ruling in Palestine. I guess that you believe that they weren’t, but don’t want to admit this.”

            I can’t help it if you are too thick to comprehend what I keep on telling you. Here it is again…

            No, we did not return to live in our ancestral homeland under Arab rule. That does not mean that war was the only other option. It is possible for ethnic groups who live together to separate peacefully. And live respectfully alongside each other with mutual respect and prosperity. Look at the Chechs and Slovaks.

            But I guess your Arabs were not into peace because they were drunk with their own perceived power over the Jews (they were wrong, weren’t they?) and they chose war instead of peacefully separating into two states.

            And that according to you is our fault because we were not willing to submit to the tyranny of the majority who have been oppressing us throughout history. What shameful behavior on our part, according to racists like you TB7 who say, “bad luck Jews, you are a minority so you have to accept what majorities dish out to you”. And you people call yourselves progressives. What a joke. All you do is invent ideology to perpetrate historical wrongs against the Jewish people. Shame on you!

            TO BE CONTINUED…

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            CONTINUED FROM BEFORE…

            TB7:”How peacefully did Jewish terrorist and separatists acquire a territory for a country and became a majority in it, since Jewish citizens of Palestine were not only a significant minority within the territory which is called “Israel” today”

            A significant minority? In 1947, Jews represented about 33% of the population of Palestine.

            In the Indian subcontinent which was partitioned around the same time, the Muslims represented only about 12% of the population yet they got their own country of Pakistan.

            Are you saying Pakistan is an illegal entity? Oh I forgot, you are deliberately avoiding an answer to this very simple question. We both know why…

            The answer is a simpe YES or a NO care to try?

            TO BE CONTINUED….

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            CONTINUED FROM BEFORE….

            Gustav: “We accepted.”

            TB7:”Rofl. ‘Your’ own historians proved that this was only an intermediary step for future expansion according to the chairman of the Jewish Agency and that it was even secretely collaborating with Jordan to split up Palestine. It’s no suprise how much territory which was not proposed to be inside the state for the Jews ‘you’ allready had occupied when it was proclaimed according to ‘your’ own words to the Security Council: “Jaffa; Northwestern Galilee, including Acre, Zib, Base, and the Jewish settlements up to the Lebanese frontier; a strip of territory alongside the road from Hilda to Jerusalem; almost all of new Jerusalem; and of the Jewish quarter within the walls of the Old City of Jerusalem.” These were all territories outside the state of Israel according to ‘your’ own words!

            Yea? Which historians are those? The anti Zionist revisionist historians? Only people like you give them credence. There are too many contradictions in their fairy tales which other more respectable historians debunk.

            Not only that but the facts contradict them. Here we are 49 years since our overwhelming military victory since 1967 and the only two territories which we formally annexed are…

            1. The Golan Heights (for security reasons).

            2. East Jerusalem (for historical reasons).

            Most of the rest of the WB has been on offer to your Arabs provided they agree to a decent peace deal and abide by it.

            How, come? If we would be guilty of the expansionism that you accuse us of, why wouldn’t we just have annexed most if not all of the WB?

            TO BE CONTINUED…

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            CONTINUED FROM BEFORE…

            TB7:”How peacefully did Jewish terrorist and separatists acquire a territory for a country and became a majority in it, since Jewish citizens of Palestine were not only a significant minority within the territory which is called “Israel” today”

            A significant minority? In 1947, Jews represented about 33% of the population of Palestine.

            In the Indian subcontinent which was partitioned around the same time, the Muslims represented only about 12% of the population yet they got their own country of Pakistan.

            Are you saying Pakistan is an illegal entity? Oh I forgot, you are deliberately avoiding an answer to this very simple question. We both know why…

            The answer is a simpe YES or a NO care to try?

            TO BE CONTINUED….

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            CONTINUED FROM BEFORE

            TB7:”So tell us Gustav, when did ‘you’, King of all Jews who speaks for all Jews ever were satisfied with any partition plan regarding the facts ‘you’ are still making on the grounds? Rofl.”

            I am King of the Jews, Benny? Oops, I mean TB7? Ok then you are king of the Arabs Rofl. Oh and while we are at this taunting and sloganeering business, tell your loving audience, when are you going to stop beating your wife? Oh I forgot, you haven’t got one. Who would marry an idiot like you?

            Gustav: “Are you saying the UN makes illegal recommendations?!”

            TB7:”The proposal within the UNSCOP to refer the same question to the International Court of Justice was rejected by simple majority and in fact only by one deciding vote. And it is know amongst the then members of the General Assembly how the US rigged the voting for resolution 181 and how many times the voting was delayed to make sure that the result was ‘acceptable’. It was even called an “US” not an UN resolution amongst some members.”

            Ah ok so now it’s the US’s fault huh?

            Perhaps the US has had a lot of sway then but today it is the Muslim/Arab block that carries sway in the UN. Are you saying they are less biased than the US when it’s about Israel?

            Personally, I think that the UN is a useless parasitic organization. That is why I am not one who claims that we exist thanks to the UN. I just wanted to make you admit what a corrupt body the UN is. And you did. So I hope you will not point at the UN to justify your outrageous claims against Israel.

            It does go both ways you know. If the UN is corrupt when it decides in favor of Israel, then by the same UN is corrupt when it decides for the Arabs.

            Do you dispute that?

            TO BE CONTINUED…

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            CONTINUED FROM BEFORE…

            TB7:”…And is out of question that BECAUSE of the principles of the right to self determination and territorial integrity enshrined in the charter of the UN the only people who had the right to decide on the future of Palestine were its citizens.”

            The citizens? You mean like the citizens deciden to partition India into two states, one Muslim (for 12% of the population) and one Hindu state for the rest of the population?

            You do know that’s what happened in Palestine too except the percentage of Jews in Palestine was greater (it was 33%). So either you accept that both Israel and Pakistan are legal countries or you reject the legality of BOTH.

            Which is it, TB7? Because if you say Israel is an illegal entity but Pakistan is legal then you are just another one eyed hypocritical propagandist.

            TB7:”But its no surprise that the UN rejected also a proposal to allow for a Palestinian referendum, not only because Zionists had a problem with the democratic principile of majority ruling as long as Jews were a minority.”

            Ok was there a democratic referendum in India before it was partitioned?

            Ok was there a democratic referendum in Bosnia before it was allowed to secede from Srbia?

            Ok was there a democratic referendum in Palestine before Eastern Palestine (now known as Jordan) was peeled off from Western Palestine?

            If the answer to any of the above is no, then you should be just as scandalized about what happened in those instances too. But you don’t seem to be. You are evading the question every time I bring it up. Or worse, you make excuses.

            TO BE CONTINUED…

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            ONTINUED FROM BEFORE…

            Gustav: “If a group of people declare war on another group of people, then each side treats ALL the members of the other group as an enemy.”

            TB7:”So you lied that there is an expressed aim to overthrow the prevailing system amongst Palestinians who wish to return.”

            Huh? I doubt that even you know what your question is. I certainly haven’t got the foggiest idea as to what you are talking about.

            TB7:”Does Israel considers its Arab citizens to be enemies, too?”

            Those who act like enemies, we consider to be enemies. The rest are our citizens.

            TB7:”And do you consider the Balfour Declaration; the mandate for Palestine; the Zionist expressed aim to create a Jewish state in Palestine; the acception of a proposal to partition a state without the consent of its majority;”

            You mean like what happened with Pakistan, Bosnia and Eastern Palestine which also separated from India, Serbia and Palestine respectively, without the consent of the majority?

            TB7:”the proclamation of the state of Israel despite a Council’s resolution in April 1948 to abstain from proclamating states pending further considerations of the future goverment of Palestine to be a “declaration of war”?

            No, the declaration of war occurred from the action of the Palestinian Arabs against the Palestinian Jews when they rioted and murdered any Jew they could lay their hands on immediately on the same day that the UN resolution was passed in 1947.

            The Jews of Palestine declared the state of Israel much later, in 1948.

            Good try though, TB7, keep up your nonsensical probing and falsification of what really happened and the chronology of events.

            TO BE CONTINUED….

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            CONTINUED FROM BEFORE…

            TB7:”2.) This was neither a secession, nor based on a partition. Jordan was not a part of Palestine, but only technically put under the mandate for Palestine. But most official documents referred to them as if they were two separate mandates. Your term “Eastern Palestine” is a term that only Zionist expansionists use.”

            Rofl (to use your expression). Look at the following reference and the map in it…

            http://www.apaame.org/2015/12/mapping-jordan.html?m=1

            “Major developments came in 1867 and – in particular, 1881 when the two expeditions sponsored by the Palestine Exploration Fund saw teams drawn from Britain’s Royal Engineers at work ‘east of Jordan’. The expedition led by Lt. Conder in 1881 had previously mapped extensively in ‘Western Palestine’. Now the grid was carried to ‘Eastern Palestine’ and places in north-western Jordan were carefully located by a sophisticated triangulation survey.”

            It clearly refers to the area of Jordan as Eastern Palestine historically. Were those people Zionists, Benny? Er um TB7?

            Let me know if you dispute this source. I have other ones which show the same thing. So let me hear you protesting about how it was illegal to detach Eastern Palestine and give it to the Hashemite Arabs.

            Nah? You don’t wanna protest that? Because Jews were not involved in that huh? And you call yourself a free spirited citizen of the world. But everytime anything has to do with Jews, you want to treat Jews differently. Only racists behave like that. Are you a racist, TB7?! Of course you are!

            TO BE CONTINUED…

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            CONTINUED FROM BEFORE…

            Gustav: “Britain had the trusteeship initially from the League of Nations and subsequently from the UN.”

            TB7:”I know, it’s a colonial crime and perversion of the mandate system regarding class A mandates and its aim to help people to govern themselves. (Compare how quickly that was implemented in former Ottoman territories mandated by France). When the Palestinian Arab’s delegates confronted the future mandatory with this, the simple answer was that the independence of Palestine had to be postponed, because of the promises, Great Britain made to Zionists. Now you make think that this is right, because its good for the Jews”

            I actually think that it wasn’t only good for the Jews but it could and shoulda been good for the Arabs too if only they wouldn’t have had hateful, nationalistic, myopic Islamo Fascist leaders like Sheik Amin Al Hussaini.

            They too would have benefited from the development of this region had they not made war on us.

            TB7:”you claim to speak for.”

            You seem to have this impression that you have the right to speak for Arabs but I an Israeli have no right to speak for us Israelis? How does that work, Benny, uh, um, TB7?

            TB7:”But it was not only a blatant denial of the right of self determination, but also of the right to select the mandatory.”

            As I said before and you keep on ignoring my point. Your idea of self determination in effect would have suppressed the right of Palestinian Jews to self determination. Your idea of self determination would have just perpetrated the old racist system in which the minority Jewish population would have been a persecuted minority. You call yourself a progressive? You people seem to be pseaudo progressives. You care only about Arab rights but not Jewish rights. And you can cut your BS that the Jews would have been citizens under the majority Arab rule, yea, we would have been third class citizens, assuming the Arabs wouldn’t have murdered or exiled us. That was their record against us as I demonstrated to you in my first post in this series of posts.

            TO BE CONTINUED…

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            CONTINUED FROM BEFORE…

            Gustav: “So you admit that the Ottoman Turks had the right to allow the Jews to return to our ancestral homeland.”

            TB7:”Gustav, just quit your propaganda nonsense “allow the Jews to return to our ancestral homeland”, if you deny the same to Palestinian Arabs who were actually living there.”

            Look buddy the reason I deny the descendants of Palestinian Arab refugees (millions of them by now) to come and live amongst us is because of what happened and because they do have very practical alternatives.

            WHAT HAPPENED: They started a war of extermination against us. Even their own leaders admitted that their expectation was that we would be driven into the sea and that it would be likened to what happened during the Mongolian invasions. Remember? I gave you their quotes.

            PRACTICAL ALTERNATIVES: they can live in the West Bank or in the Arab countries in which they already reside and which got rid of even more Jews most of whom now live in Israel. This is a fair outcome, a population exchange. Refugees for refugees…

            TB7:”The Ottomans had the right to allow or to deny the immigration of anyone.”

            I am glad you admit at least that. And indeed many Jews returned during the Ottoman era.

            Gustav: “But you reject Britains right to do the same? On what grounds?! ”

            TB7:”Palestine was never a part of Great Britain. So what rights had Great Britain to declare that it will help a group of foreigners to immigrate into a country which was not Great Britain?”

            LOL. What right?

            1. They were the rulers of the territory.

            2. The terms of the trusteeship from the League of Nations, was to create a homeland for the Jewish people. How could they do that if they would have stopped Jewish immigration?

            3. Palestine was an underdeveloped backwater and they perceived that the inflow of Jewish labor, know-how, enterprise and capital would benefit all Palestinians. Indeed it did. And it led to Arab immigration into Palestine too, not just Jewish immigration. Arabs from neighboring countries immigrated too when they perceived opportunities for themselves as they saw Palestine develop.

            TO BE CONTINUED…

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            CONTINUED FROM BEFORE…

            TB7:”The Palestinian Arabs didn’t need to enforce anything. Neither the acquisition of territory, nor becoming a majority in it.”

            Of course you are wrong. They needed to and they tried. They just didn’t succeed. They tried to stop us going our own way and establish Israel. They made war on us and out of that war, some of their pre-war propaganda became a self fulfilling prophecy which would not have happened otherwise.

            Gustav: “Yea, the Arabs should …”

            TB7:”Again, it’s not about the number of countries, but about the right to self determination of the inhabitants within a country.”

            It is about justice. It is injustice to deprive one group of people of self determination and doom us to ongoing persecution under majority rule. While at the same time giving the other group huge swathes of land and 23 countries in which they would have self determination. It is however just to set aside 0.5% of the land which in any case used to be our land historically and allow us to establish an independent state in that small land.

            Gustav: “Does Kosovo recognize Israel?”

            TB7:”Sure, that’s why the Kosovarians went to Israel to ask them to recognize Kosovo.”

            Well then if a Muslim country like Kosovo recognizes us, why don’t you? They must agree with me that them peeling off Serbia was no different to the Partition of Palestine into two states.

            As for why Israel does not recognize them, yet? That’s politics for you. I think we SHOULD recognize them. But I am not king of the Jews am I? LOL.

            Gustav: “By the way, you still didn’t answer my questions about…
            1. Pakistan
            2. Eastern Palestine (Jordan)
            3. Kosovo.”

            TB7:”I answered this many times, but you choose to ignore this.”

            You most definitely did not answer my simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ question here it is again…

            1. Is Pakistan a legitimate state? Yes or No?

            2. Is Kosovo a legitimate state? Yes or No?

            3. Is Jordan a legitimate state? Yes or No?

            For the record: my answer is YES to all three. Now are you going to finally answer, or not?!

            TB7:”And the fact that you highlight that Muslims are affected in these cases is just another demontration of your blatant racism.”

            Really? So according to you it is verboten to talk about Muslims?

            TB7:”1.) Did India oppose Britain’s partition?”

            Evidently they did because the partition didn’t go smoothly. There was an almighty war between the two peoples. Ghandi got assassinated by the opponents of partition and millions of others died and became refugees on both sides in the ensuing war. Do you deny that, TB7?

            TB7:”3.) This was not based on partition either. The question which arises is, if one can make a moral case for secession, if the fundamental rights of those who wish to seced are fundamentally violated.”

            You mean like Jewish rights were violated while we were minorites, yes, in Palestine too. See my first post the one immediately after your most recent post.

            TB7:”For example if the Goverment makes them live under martial law (like Israel made its Arabs live until 1966).”

            So if we are so evil, why are they against the Liberman proposal which would in effect allow the Arabs of the Galil to secede from us? Why is that supposedly a racist prosal given that they would keep all their lands and assets but they would be part of the proposed Palestinian state instead? Why do they feel that they have to stay joined at the hip with us?

            TB7:”Anyway, this case can’t be even compared to Israel’s case, cause the people who wanted to secede were even a minority in the territory which only this minority wanted to secede. The citizens of their newly created state are not even all considered to be nationals of this state and the real majority was expelled, either directly or post facto.”

            WTF are you talking about? Have you got a fever?

            Gustav: “On the other hand, if you don’t respond again, I will take your silence as confirmation that my claim is correct.”

            TB7:”Ok. Then I will do the same from now on, too. Especially regarding all the questions you don’t want to answer, because I think that they expose your double standard, racism or even supremacism. Be my guest.”

            I responded to ALL your BS and you know it Benny, er um TB7.

            Reply to Comment
    5. Click here to load previous comments
© 2010 - 2017 +972 Magazine
Follow Us
Credits

+972 is an independent, blog-based web magazine. It was launched in August 2010, resulting from a merger of a number of popular English-language blogs dealing with life and politics in Israel and Palestine.

Website powered by RSVP

Illustrations: Eran Mendel