Surplus Jews

[kayecy]

195. I will attempt to answer all three of your posts at one go........

Correct me if I am wrong, but we now seem to be in agreement on the ethical principle that:

All people should have equal rights, whether living in sovereign states or are stateless.

We still disagree on the application of this principle......

1. Should the Palestinans have the right to defend Palestine against immigrants?
You say that Palestinian Arabs should have had the same rights as Americans and Israelis in that these people write up a petition, go on strike or hold a protest to stop immigrants coming to their territory....You then go on to say the Palestinians did not have the right to use force.

My answer:
The Americans had a navy which stopped Jewish immigrants landing in the 30s by force and Israel has the IDF that doesn’t hesitate to shoot Syrians when they try and enter Israel......So, how were the Palestinians supposed to stop the immigrants arriving?......Appeal to Britain who had just declared Palestine (not Britain) to be the Jewish homeland?......Palestinians like Americans and Israelis should have had a military force to stop unwonted immigrants at the borders but they didn’t.....Britain and Zionism were immoral in taking advantage of this weakness.

2. Are the incomers to Fort Greene going to create a sovereign state?
You say that just as the residents of Fort Greene are not allowed to kill recent immigrants or any members of the wave of gentrifying professionals, the Arabs of Palestine had no legal or ethical right to violently resist legal immigrants

My answer:
Is fort Greene a valid analogy?....Do the Fort Greene locals have a real fear that the ‘incomers’ intend to create a sovereign ‘incomers’ state?.......Are the ‘incomers’ going to usurp the US Federal Government? ......Are they going to make laws that in future only ‘incomers’ can immigrate to Fort Greene and the locals will never be allowed to return to where they were born?

3. Does the UDHR say everyone has a right to self defence?
You say that nowhere in the entire document does it even obliquely refer to self-defense or the right to defend land that you consider yours from being purchased by members of a different ethnicity

My answer:
You are quite right......The UDHR does not mention self-defence, but it does stipulate that all people are born equal, so if Israelis think they have a right to allow the IDF to use force to stop immigrants, then so did the Palestinians.

4. Are the rights of newly immigrant Jews dependent on whether immigration has been accepted by the indigenous majority.
You say that if everyone deserves the same rights, why should the rights of newly immigrated Jewish people be dependent on whether their residency is accepted by a specific ethnic group.

My answer:
Because those Jewish immigrants should have the same rights as immigrants everywhere......First their immigration must be accepted by the indigenous majority (through their government if they have one) be it European, Arab or Jew......That is what is meant by everyone having equal rights is it not?....Can you try and explain your point again?....Are you suggesting that the indigenous residents of Palestine should not have had the same right as other people to stop immigration to their territory?

5. Was all of Palestine Arab land?
You say that Arabs lived on a very small part of the land and in Jerusalem there was a Jewish majority, so why did Jerusalem have to be Arab?

My answer:
In 1920 there were about 80,000 Jews and 600,000 Arabs/Bedouin......Palestine, although not independent, was a defined area......I think the only area with a Jewish majority was Jerusalem, so I suppose you could argue that the Zionists could all have piled into Jerusalem and made it a city state in the middle of Palestine.....Is that what you are suggesting?.......The rest of Palestine had an Arab majority and had a right to keep out alien immigrants wanting to create an alien state, just like any other indigenous majority in any other area.

6. Why should the unused land of Palestine belong to the Arabs?
My answer:
For the same reason that unused land in the USA belongs collectively to its citizens......Would Israel allow Palestinians to buy desert land and settle in the Negev?

7. Does mass immigration reduce the ability of the indigenous folk to choose their own rulers?
You say it does not and that Partition proved that point

My answer:
What partition agreement are you referring to?....As far as I am aware there was no partition proposal until 1938, long after Zionists had been piling into Palestine and changed the balance of power.........

8. Did the Arabs have a right to land they did not own?

My answer
It depends what you mean by ‘right’......Collectively they had as much right to decide the use of that land as do Americans over waste land they do not own......Remember, ethically, all men should have equal rights whether citizens of a sovereign state or are ‘stateless’.

9. Were Palestinians demanding more rights than other emerging people?
You say that they had the same rights as Jordanians who had a Hashemite ruler forced on them and an undemocratic government.

My answer:
You are right that the Zionist were more democratic than the Hashemites......But are you claiming that Jordanian Arabs would therefore have preferred Zionist rule?.......I believe that what the Jordanians, Lebanese, Syrians and the Palestinians all wanted was independence from foreign rule and to be able to decide their own future.....Britain and France flagrantly ignored the wishes of the people, and there is no excuse for that.....However, the mandates and imposed rulers were always likely to have a finite life and the inhabitants could reasonably expect to rule themselves eventually, even the Jordanian situation can change......Not so with the indigenous residents of Palestine.......They alone were to be subject to mass immigration by an alien culture and forced to live under its rule for ever.... As President Wilson said, the indigenous people should have “an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development.”.... Zionist immigration prevented that, and that is why Zionism is and was immoral.

10. Will the Palestinians ever be able to rule over Palestine?
You say that Palestinians under Arafat ruled over much of Palestine.

My answer:
The area ruled by Arafat was never sovereign and in any case consisted of about 10% of Mandate Palestine.....Even today there are many in Likud who insist that Israel’s eastern border is the Jordan........Neither Abu Mazen nor any other Palestinian can ever hope to rule over even half of Mandate Palestine thanks to the mass Zionists immigration.

11. Did the indigenous Palestinians make it clear they did’nt want Zionist immigration?
You claim that Prince Faisal agreed on Zionist immigration.....You also claim that it was not until later, when immigration really increased that there was serious dissatisfaction voiced and violence.

My answer:
The agreement with Faisal was in 1919, but in any case, Faisal was not the leader of the Palestinian Arabs.....In fact he is quoted as being "....contemptuous of the Palestinian Arabs whom he doesn't even regard as Arabs".

The Palestinians responded by armed struggle against the Zionist settlers
as early as 1886, when a group of peasants, pushed into a corner by
the loss of their land, attacked the settlers in Al-Khdirah and Petah Tiqva
‘mlabis’.

After 1908 the opposition increased. According to C. D. Smith this was due to the emergence of Labor Zionism, which openly opposed Jewish employment of Arabs, condemned leaving Arab peasants on land held by Jews, and aimed at a separate Jewish entity in Palestine.

You have made this claim of negligible early Palestinian resistance before......Do you want me to supply more evidence?.......Have you some evidence that early Palestinians did not object to Zionism?

12. Did the ex-ottoman colonies achieve autonomous development?
You say that all of the ex-Ottoman’s had monarchies installed.

My answer:
Very true, they did mostly have monarchies installed, but they all eventually achieved autonomous development.......except Palestine.

13. The Jordanians killed more Palestinians in 1948 than Israel has done since
My answer:
Total Palestinian deaths in 1948 from Jordanians, Israelis and others = 2,800 to 4,000.
Total Palestinian deaths due 1878 & 1982 Lebanon Conflicts, First Intifada, Second Intifada and Cast Lead = 10,500 plus....Your statement appears to be wrong.

14. Is every action that may result in part or all of Palestine falling under the sovereignty of anyone OTHER than Arab people inherently unethical?

My answer:
Any action that results in Palestine being partitioned or ruled by anyone not supported by the indigenous people of Palestine is unethical.....This includes, Britain, Jordan, Egypt and of course the Zionists.......A lot of people have ruled and behaved very unethically towards the Palestinians, but only Zionists/Israelis continue to do so.