Worthy News: Hamas: Olmert must accept less - Jerusalem Post

[O'Dannyboy]

I am pretty sure that all of the references Shiloh is refering to are refering to the land that was promised to the Nation or people of Israel. Israel being Jacob and all his desendants. I don't think in those days that the land itself was refered to as Israel but as the property of the nation of Isreal.

[Guest shiloh357]

I am pretty sure that all of the references Shiloh is refering to are refering to the land that was promised to the Nation or people of Israel. Israel being Jacob and all his desendants. I don't think in those days that the land itself was refered to as Israel but as the property of the nation of Isreal.

No, the references clearly state that the Land was called Israel. Judea and Samaria, The Galilee are simply the names of regions within the Land of Israel. The angel Gabriel called it Israel, Jesus called it Israel, and the author Mathew calls it Israel. The nation as whole is repeatedly called Israel, both the Land and the people. I could list many, many references if you wish. The plain meaning of the text simply calls the Land as whole, Israel. It simply means that the map-makers need to swallow their pride and create maps that more accurately reflect the truth.

[O'Dannyboy]

Please share a few of those scriptures Shiloh.

"go into the land of Israel" and "came into the land of Israel" could both easily mean to the land belonging to Israel, and not neccesarily the land called Israel. "not in Israel" could very well have meant not among the nation of Israel. Going back to the original texts might very well prove to complicate the issue because of the broad meanings of the original Latin and Hebrew. However I will do a search myself when I go home and research the uses of "Israel" in reference to the land. It simply seems odd to me that Jacobs encounter and Gods' naming him Israel would loose some of its signifcance by later applying that name not only to his seed but also to the land which they were promissed.

[Guest shiloh357]

Please share a few of those scriptures Shiloh.

"go into the land of Israel" and "came into the land of Israel" could both easily mean to the land belonging to Israel, and not neccesarily the land called Israel. "not in Israel" could very well have meant not among the nation of Israel. Going back to the original texts might very well prove to complicate the issue because of the broad meanings of the original Latin and Hebrew. However I will do a search myself when I go home and research the uses of "Israel" in reference to the land. It simply seems odd to me that Jacobs encounter and Gods' naming him Israel would loose some of its signifcance by later applying that name not only to his seed but also to the land which they were promissed.

"go into the land of Israel" and "came into the land of Israel" could both easily mean to the land belonging to Israel, and not neccesarily the land called Israel. "not in Israel" could very well have meant not among the nation of Israel.

So what is the difference between saying "the Land belonging to Israel" and "the land of Israel?"

Mary and Joseph were not commanded to go to Judea, nor Galilee, nor Samaria. They were not told to go to Bethlehem, or Nazereth, nor Jerusalem. They were commanded to go to Israel. They could have gone anywhere in Israel they wanted to go. You are trying to make something out nothing. It really is a nonissue.

"Not among the nation Israel" would be a very good rendering of what Jesus said in Matt. 8:11, and no different than what I said. You admit that they would have called their nation Israel. So you put that nation on a map, why would you not call it Israel?? If someone pointed and said, "what is that?" "Why, it is Israel," would be the appropriate response.

It really is that simple. They called their nation Israel, and to deny that, takes a healthy dose of intellectual suicide.

As for looking at the original languages... in Hebrew, it is called Haeretz Yisroel, "The Land Of Israel."

The word for "Land" in Greek is "ghay." According to Thayer, it has five possible uses:

1) arable land

2) the ground, the earth as a standing place

3) the main land as opposed to the sea or water

4) the earth as a whole

4a) the earth as opposed to the heavens

4b) the inhabited earth, the abode of men and animals

5) a country, land enclosed within fixed boundaries, a tract of land, territory, region

The only one that fits the context is number 5. In Matt 2, "ghay" can only mean country, since Israel had a solvent, working monarchial government. It had fixed boundries and had its own education, economic and governmental infrastructure.

So when the angel said, go into the Land of Israel, he was not talking about soil, or dry land, but rather he was commanding them to return within the boundries of their country of origin, Israel. To claim that they did not call their Land, their country, Israel, does not square with the facts.

[Catsmeow]

Here's another article:

Ynet News: Feb 14, 2006

Hamas politburo chief Khaled Mashaal said that the organization's goal is to liberate Jerusalem. "Our mission is to liberate Jerusalem and purify the al-Aqsa Mosque. Islam goes forward because its power comes from Allah and it will continue to advance in spite of its opposers," Mashaal said during a conference in support of Hamas organized by Sudanese parties in the capital of Khartoum.

[amor]

Except the data from the article doesn't include Transjordan check it and see rather than spouting of.

Tell you what genius, maybe you ought to actually read the article, yourself. It pretty much torpedoes just about all of the lame, empty-headed drivel you have spouted since have been on these boards.

In the first place, the article demonstrates that Arab immigration into Palestine increased significantly from 1922 onward Here is a quote from your article:

3. Zionist settlement between 1880 and 1948 did not displace or dispossess Palestinians. Every indication is that there was net Arab immigration into Palestine in this period, and that the economic situation of Palestinian Arabs improved tremendously under the British Mandate relative to surrounding countries. By 1948, there were approximately 1.35 million Arabs and 650,000 Jews living between the Jordan and the Mediterranean, more Arabs than had ever lived in Palestine before, and more Jews than had lived there since Roman times. Analysis of population by subdistricts shows that Arab population tended to increase the most between 1931 and 1948 in the same areas where there were large proportions of Jews. Therefore, Zionist immigration did not displace Arabs.

As article itself demonstrates, the Arab population in connection with the larger populations of Jews. The article you provided also provides a link to a site entitled "Zionism and its Impact." It demonstrates that as Jewish immigration increased so did the standard of living, not to mention Muslim literacy. It torpedoes the lie you spew that Zionism sought to displace or dispossess the Arabs. It agrees with other Arab historical sources (1948-1955) which place the blame for the plight of the Palestinians squarely on the shoulders of the Arab world, where it belongs. You should read more of the source that you cited. It was a big help to me. It only confirmed what I have been trying to tell people like you for years.

The bottom line is that you are wrong. The Arab population West of the Jordan increased with the influx of Jews. It did not begin before that. It was only after the Jews began irrigating deserts, drying up the Malaria infested swamps, and making the land livable that the Arabs had any interest in it, and began living there.

It is well known that the Arabs considered the Land purchased by the Jews from the Sursuks (Absentee Arab Landowners in Lebanon) to be worthless and cursed. It was uninhabitable, and the Sursuks were all too happy to get it off their hands for an extravagant price. Even before that, Mark Twain described the Holy Land he visited as barren, and devoid of any living thing, save some foxes and birds of prey. He considered the Holy Land less than impressive. It was in the towns scattered about such as Jerusalem that he found any appreciable human habitation. Prior to the Jewish re-settlement, the land West of the Jordan river was pretty much desolate.

[Guest shiloh357]

However there was considerable displacement of the Arab population after 1948, hence all those folk in the refugeee camps of the region. Secondly the fact that the arab population increased in the first half of the century does not mean there was no Arab population during the ottoman period, that article clearly, shows

1. I did not say there was no Arab population during the Ottoman. My point was the opposite.

2. The diplacement of the Arab population is the fault of the Arabs, not Israel. I have posted remarks from Arab and European columnists and commentators who were eye witnesses to the events in the Middle East. Even the Arab newspapers from the time period place the blame for the displacement squarely on the shoulders of the invading Arab armies.

that to be the case. As do the old towns and villages, some repopulated some abandoned and ploughed over that modern Israel is dotted with, afterall somebody must have lived in them, even Shiloh must believe that.

Huh??? As I already stated, that land that Israel purchased was mostly swamp and desert. It was inhospitable. That is not to say there were no Arabs West of the Jordan. You are really missing the point, amor.

[amor]

2. The diplacement of the Arab population is the fault of the Arabs, not Israel. I have posted remarks from Arab and European columnists and commentators who were eye witnesses to the events in the Middle East. Even the Arab newspapers from the time period place the blame for the displacement squarely on the shoulders of the invading Arab armies.

Some stuff here with some quotes from your friend Prof Morris but also Ben Gurion and Rabin, no doubt also anti-semites in your strange view of the world, but nevertheless folk who were involved in what happenerd at the time, suggesting that whjatr you claim is not accurate. I know we've gone over this before, but just for the record I have more faith in the accounts of Israeli politicians who were there on the ground that in history that emerges from your mind.

Upon Lydda's and Ramla's occupation on July 11-12, 1948, the Israelis were surprised to find that over 60,000 Palestinian civilians didn't flee their homes. Subsequently, Ben-Gurion ordered the wholesale expulsion of all civilians (including man women, children, and old people), in the middle of the hot Mediterranean summer. The orders to ethnically cleanse both cities were signed the future Prime Minister of Israel, by Yitzhak Rabin. Many of the refugees died (400+ according to the Palestinian historian 'Aref al-'Aref) from thirst, hunger, and heat exhaustion after being stripped of their valuables on the way out by the Israeli soldiers.

From the quotes below, it shall be conclusively proven that the Palestinian version of the events (at least in the cases of Lydda and Ramla) are is the true version. It should be noted the Zionist account of this war crime was intentionally suppressed until Yitzhak Rabin reported it in his biography and in a New York Times interview (which was censored in Israel at the time), however, it was later confirmed in the declassified Israeli and Zionist archives.

The Washington Report: Expulsion of the Palestinians- Lydda and Ramlehin 1948

Zionist FAQ: Palestinian people in 1948 left their homes based on the orders of their leaders

"Our exodus from Lydda depicted in a series of art paintings" By Ismail Shammout

Cleansing Jaffa: Detailed eyewitness account By Shukri Salameh

Famous Quotes

Yitzhak Rabin wrote in his diary soon after Lydda's and Ramla's occupation on 10th-11th of July 1948:

"After attacking Lydda [later called Lod] and then Ramla, .... What would they do with the 50,000 civilians living in the two cities ..... Not even Ben-Gurion could offer a solution .... and during the discussion at operation headquarters, he [ben-Gurion] remained silent, as was his habit in such situations. Clearly, we could not leave [Lydda's] hostile and armed populace in our rear, where it could endangered the supply route [to the troops who were] advancing eastward.

Ben-Gurion would repeat the question: What is to be done with the population?, waving his hand in a gesture which said: Drive them out! [garush otam in Hebrew]. 'Driving out' is a term with a harsh ring, .... Psychologically, this was on of the most difficult actions we undertook". (Soldier Of Peace, p. 140-141 & Benny Morris, p. 207) .

Later, Rabin underlined the cruelty of the operation as mirrored in the reaction of the soldiers, he stated during an interview (which was censored in Israeli publications) with David Shipler from the New York Times on October 22, 1979:

"Great Suffering was inflicted upon the men taking part in the eviction action. [They] included youth-movement graduates who had been inculcated with values such as international brotherhood and humaneness. The eviction action went beyond the concepts they were used to. There were some fellows who refused to take part. . . Prolonged propaganda activities were required after the action . . . to explain why we were obliged to undertake such a harsh and cruel action." (Simha Flapan, p. 101)

It should be noted that just before the outbreak of the war in 1948, the residents of the two cities, Lydda and Ramla, constituted close to 20% of the total urban population in central Palestine, including Jewish Tel-Aviv. Currently, these people and their descendants number nearly half a million, and they mostly live in deplorable refugee camps around Amman (Jordan) and Ramallah (West Bank). Based on Rabin's personal account of events, the decision to ethnically cleanse the two cities was not an easy one, however, that did not stop him from giving a similar order, 19 years later, to ethnically cleanse and destroy the villages of 'Imwas, Yalu, and Bayt Nuba. The exodus from these cities was portrayed firsthand by Ismail Shammout, the renowned Palestinian artist from Lydda, click here to view his exodus gallery.

On July 24, 1948 the Mapai Center held a full-scale debate regarding the Palestinian Arab question against the background of the ethnic cleansing of Ramla and Lydda. The majority apparently backed Ben-Gurion's policies of population transfer or ethnic cleansing. Shlomo Lavi, one of the influential leaders of the Mapai party, said that:

"the ... transfer of the [Palestinian] Arabs out of the country in my eyes is one of the most just, moral, and correct that can be done. I have thought of this for many years." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 192)

When the First Truce ended, Operation Dani headquarters (near Ramle and Lydda) informed the Israeli General Staff on July 10 1948:

"a general and considerable [civilian] flight from Ramle. There is great value in continuing the bombing." During the afternoon, the headquarters asked the General Staff for renewed bombing, and informed one of the brigades: "Flight from the town of Ramle of women, the old, and children is to be facilitated. The [military age] males are to be detained." (Benny Morris, p. 204)

Soon after the Lydda massacre was carried out by the Israeli Army Yiftah Brigade on July 10, 1948, Mula Cohen (the brigade's commander) wrote of his experience when expelling the 50,000-60,000 Palestinians who inhabited Ramle and Lydda:

"There is no doubt the Lydda-Ramle affair and the flight of the inhabitants, the uprising and the expulsion [geirush in Hebrew] that followed cut deep grooves in all who underwent [these experiences]." (Benny Morris, p. 206)

Yitzhak Rabbin, the commander of Operation Dani in Ramle area, communicated the following explicit orders at 1:30 PM on July 12, 1948 to Yiftah Brigade (see above quote):

"1. The inhabitants of Lydda must be expelled quickly without attention to age. They should be directed towards Beit Nabala. Yiftah [brigade headquarters] must determine the method and inform [Operation] Dani HQ and the 8th Brigade.

2. Implement immediately." The order was signed "Yitzhak R[abin]." A similar order, concerning Ramle, was apparently communicated to Kiryati Brigade headquarters at the same time. (Benny Morris, p. 207)

On July 16 1948 Aharon Cizling, the 1st Israeli Agriculture Minister, cautioned the Israeli cabinet (a few weeks after the ethnic cleansing of 60,000 people from Lydda and Ramla):

"We are embarking on a course that will most greatly endanger any hope of peaceful alliance with forces who could be our allies in the Middle East .... Hundreds of thousands of [Palestinian] Arabs who will be evicted from Palestine, even if they are to blame, and left hanging in the midair, will grow to hate us. If you do things in the heat of the war, in the midst of the battle, it's one thing. But if after a month, you do it in cold blood, for political reason, in public, that is something altogether different." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 191)

And on the same subject, Cizling also said during a Cabinet meeting:

"I have to say that this phrase [regarding the treatment of Ramla's inhabitants] is a subtle order to expel the [Palestinian] Arabs from Ramla. If I'd receive such an order this is how I would interpret it. An order given during the conquest which states that the door is open and that all [Palestinian] Arabs may leave, regardless of age, and sex, or they may stay, however, the army will not be responsible for providing food. When such things are said during actual conquest, at the moment of conquest, and after all that has already happened in Jaffa and other places. . . . I would interpret it as a warning: save yourself while you can get out." (1949, The First Israelis, p. 27)

And also went on to describe his dismay at the looting of the Palestinian Ramla City (but not at the raping of Palestinian women), Cizling stated:

". ..It's been said that . 'there were cases of rape in Ramla. I can forgive rape, but I will not forgive other acts which seem to me much worse. When they enter a town and forcibly remove rings from the fingers and jewelry from someone's neck, that's a very grave matter. ... Many are guilty of it." (1949, The First Israelis, p. 71-72)

All the Israelis who witnessed the events agreed that the expulsion of the inhabitants of Lydda and Ramle, under the hot July sun, was an extended episode of suffering for the Palestinian refugees, especially those from Lydda. Some were stripped by Israeli soldiers of their valuables as they left the town or at checkpoints along the way. An Israeli archeologist, known by Guttman, subsequently described the trek of the Palestinian refugees out of Lydda:

"A multitude of inhabitants walked one after another. Women walked burdened with packages and sacks on their heads. Mothers dragged children after them . . . Occasionally, warning shots were heard . . . Occasionally, you encountered a piercing look from one of the youngsters . . . in the column, and the look said: We have not yet surrendered. We shall return to fight you." For Guttman, an Israeli archeologist, the spectacle conjured up "the memory of the exile of Israel [a the end of the Second Commonwealth, at Roman hands.]" (Benny Morris, p. 207)

A Palmach (the Israeli strike force) report, probably written by Yigal Allon soon after Operation Dani, stated that the expulsion of the Lydda and Ramla Palestinian inhabitants, besides relieving Tel Aviv of a potential, long-term threat, had:

"clogged the routes of the advance of the [Transjordan Arab] Legion and had foisted upon the Arab economy the problem of "maintaining another 45,000 souls . . . Moreover, the phenomenon of the flight of tens of thousands will no doubt cause demoralisation in every Arab area [the refugees] reach . . . This victory will yet have great effect on other sectors." (Benny Morris, p. 211 & Israel: A History, p. 218)

And in response to report above, the Israeli MAPAM party co-leader, Meir Ya'ari, criticized Allon's use of tens of thousands of Palestinian refugees to achieve a military strategic goal, he stated:

"Many of us are LOSING their [human] image . . How easily they speak of how it is possible and permissible to take women, children, and old men and to fill the road with them because such is the imperative of strategy. And this we say, the members of Hashomer Hatzair, who remember who used this means against our people during the Second World] war. . . . I am appalled." (Benny Morris, p. 211)

[Guest shiloh357]

Yeah I figured you would bring up Morris' "history" sooner or later. Of course, you will believe anyone as long as they anti-Israel (anti-Semitic). That is just your style.

For your information, that loon, Benny Morris has been debunked. So many inaccuracies and outright lies have been uncovered and exposed about his historical revisions, it isn't even funny. He is entirely unreliable as a historian. You seem to have this misconception that Jews cannot be anti-Semitic, and yet some of the most virulent anti-Semites, and some of the most deplorable characters in Jewish history have been Jews. Of course, that does not stop people like you from holding them up to support silly, empty-headed view of Israel and its history.

Here is a couple articles that deal with that lying peace of trash, Benny Morris. The article charges Benny Morris with five types of distortion:

Morris engages in five types of distortion: he misrepresents documents, resorts to partial quotes, withholds evidence, makes false assertions, and rewrites original documents.

Benny Morris and The Reign of Error

Benny Morris's Reign of Error, Revisited

Perhaps when you can come up with a real historian, and real history, you might have something to say that is worth respecting. I won't hold my breath.

I know we've gone over this before, but just for the record I have more faith in the accounts of Israeli politicians who were there on the ground that in history that emerges from your mind.

While you are quoting a liar, and bogus long debunked "historian," Here are statements from Arabs and others who were eyewitnesses to the Arab expulsion:

"It must not be forgotten that the Arab Higher Committee encouraged the refugees' flight from their homes in Jaffa, Haifa, and Jerusalem."

- Near East Arabic Broadcasting Station, Cyprus, April 3, 1949

"This wholesale exodus was due partly to the belief of the Arabs, encouraged by the boasting of an unrealistic Arab press and the irresponsible utterances of some of the Arab leaders that it could be only a matter of some weeks before the Jews were defeated by the armies of the Arab States and the Palestinian Arabs enabled to re-enter and retake possession of their country."

- Edward Atiyah (then Secretary of the Arab League Office in London) in The Arabs (London, 1955), p. 183

"The mass evacuation, prompted partly by fear, partly by order of Arab leaders, left the Arab quarter of Haifa a ghost city...By withdrawing Arab workers their leaders hoped to paralyze Haifa.".

- Time, May 3, 1948, p. 25

The Arab States encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies.

- Falastin (Jordanian newspaper), February 19, 1949

We will smash the country with our guns and obliterate every place the Jews seek shelter in. The Arabs should conduct their wives and children to safe areas until the fighting has died down.

- Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Said, quoted in Sir Am Nakbah ("The Secret Behind the Disaster") by Nimr el Hawari, Nazareth, 1952

"[The Arabs of Haifa] fled in spite of the fact that the Jewish authorities guaranteed their safety and rights as citizens of Israel." - Monsignor George Hakim, Greek Catholic Bishop of Galilee, according to Rev. Karl Baehr, Executive Secretary of the American Christian Palestine Committee, New York Herald Tribune, June 30, 1949

"Every effort is being made by the Jews to persuade the Arab populace to stay and carry on with their normal lives, to get their shops and businesses open and to be assured that their lives and interests will be safe. [However] ...A large road convoy, escorted by [british] military . . . left Haifa for Beirut yesterday. . . . Evacuation by sea goes on steadily. ...[Two days later, the Jews were] still making every effort to persuade the Arab populace to remain and to settle back into their normal lives in the towns... [as for the Arabs,] another convoy left Tireh for Transjordan, and the evacuation by sea continues. The quays and harbor are still crowded with refugees and their household effects, all omitting no opportunity to get a place an one of the boats leaving Haifa.""

- Haifa District HQ of the British Police, April 26, 1948, quoted in Battleground by Samuel Katz

" The existence of these refugees is a direct result of the Arab States' opposition to the partition plan and the reconstitution of the State of Israel. The Arab states adopted this policy unanimously, and the responsibility of its results, therefore is theirs. ...The flight of Arabs from the territory allotted by the UN for the Jewish state began immediately after the General Assembly decision at the end of November 1947. This wave of emigration, which lasted several weeks, comprised some thirty thousand people, chiefly well-to-do-families."

- Emil Ghory, secretary of the Arab High Council, Lebanese daily Al-Telegraph, 6 Sept 1948

Even the media sources of the time period demonstrate that the Jews did not cause the expulsion of the Palestinians. Even the Arab sources lay the blame squarely on the Arabs.

I have a lot more Arabs I can quote, and the Times of London as well, if you like. I have eyewitnesses, you have some washed up "historian." Frankly, you can put your faith in Benny Morris if you like. I prefer intelligent, credible research upon which to base my views. I could also not help but notice that the Palestinian website that you pulled this "Washington Report" from is rife with historical inaccuracies that can be easily demonstrated as false even from Arab the media of the time period. It also shows that you are not interested in factual accuracy of any kind. I googled several of the quotes you offered and most of them are found on different Palestinian/Arab webistes. You choose to cite from webistes run by anti-Semitic entitie, but don't want to be called anti-Semitic. A person is known by the company they keep. You have decided that the Palestinian record of "history" is the one you accept. I of course accept the reputable, verifiable historical accounts. You prefer lies to the truth.

[amor]

The problem for you is that it is not only Morris who claims that this happened, but also Rabin who was responsible for the forced evacuation of Lydda and Ramla. If the word of an Israeli general and Prime-Minister isn't good enough for you, then you have about as much command of historical reality as the President of Iran.

"Great Suffering was inflicted upon the men taking part in the eviction action. [They] included youth-movement graduates who had been inculcated with values such as international brotherhood and humaneness. The eviction action went beyond the concepts they were used to. There were some fellows who refused to take part. . . Prolonged propaganda activities were required after the action . . . to explain why we were obliged to undertake such a harsh and cruel action."