Skip to comments.**Graphic Content Warning** Photos of Suicide Blast in Israel
Posted on 03/27/2002 12:29:07 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
|A victim of the Netanya hotel bomb blast, with his face covered in blood, sits in an ambulance arriving at the Kfar Saba hospital Wednesday, March 27, 2002. A suicide bomber blew himself up Wednesday in the hotel dining room in this Israeli resort as guests gathered for a Passover Seder, the ritual evening meal ushering in the Jewish holiday. Police said 15 people were killed and more than 100 wounded in one of the deadliest attacks in 18 months of fighting. (AP Photo/Gadi Kabalo) ***ISRAEL OUT***|
|A policeman stands near a line of bodies outside a hotel in the Israeli seaside resort of Netanya March 27, 2002 after it was attacked. The Islamic militant group Hamas claimed responsibility on Wednesday for the suicide bombing of an Israeli hotel that killed at least 15 people. REUTERS/Havakuk Levison|
|Police carry a body after a bomb exploded in Netanya, Israel March 27, 2002. A suicide bomber blew himself up in the dining room of an Israeli coastal hotel on Wednesday evening, killing 15 people and wounding more than 100, police and medical rescue workers said. REUTERS/Laszlo Balogh|
|Rescue workers look over the damaged hotel in the Israeli seaside resort of Netanya March 27, 2002. The Islamic militant group Hamas claimed responsibility on Wednesday for the suicide bombing of an Israeli hotel that killed at least 15 people. REUTERS/Havakuk Levison|
Palestinian militant group claims responsibility for suicide bombing (AP)
The Islamic militant who blew himself up Wednesday in the dining hall of an Israeli hotel in Netanya once worked in hotels in the Mediterranean resort town, Palestinian security sources said.
- Mar 27 3:46 PM ET
U.S. Condemns Suicide Bombing in Israel (Reuters)
The United States condemned the bombing which killed 15 people in the Israeli town of Netanya on Wednesday and said it showed the need for Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to crack down on militants.
- Mar 27 3:26 PM ET
Explosion at Israeli hotel during Passover; 15 killed (AP)
A suicide bomber blew himself up Wednesday evening in a hotel dining room in the Israeli coastal resort of Netanya as guests gathered there for a Passover Seder, the ritual meal ushering in the Jewish holiday. Police said 15 people were killed and more than 100 wounded.
- Mar 27 1:37 PM ET
Everything else is just jealousy and noise.
It's not worth any normal person's time to argue with a pothead.
Well, Ebuck... I will answer your question with another question.... What was the Nazi's problem with the Jews? Did the Jews steal their property as well just before WWII? And tell me, how did these Jews manage that, after living in the country for centuries???
Tell me, what was the Russian's problem with the Jews? Why were they devastated and driven off their land after being beaten, murdered and raped in the Pogroms??? Did they too manage to steal the land by being forced there?
Perhaps you better take a good look in the mirror. Perhaps you will notice that little swastika. Good luck.
I think that I have it right, but I am sure that someone will correct me if I am wrong. Anyway, there never was a self-governing Palestine and the Arabs were not happy with the fact that the Jews got any territory. Maybe they would have been happier under the Turks.
A bit of historical knowledge and perspective will help you figure it out. All of the Arab world hates the very idea of Israeli existence.
Historical Israel has existed for 5,000 years or more. The history of the people and the land did not begin in 1948.
The Palestinians are interlopers and they have no homeland because other Arab countries will not accept them. Is it any wonder why?
True. So does that give them the same rights to the land that the Israelis claim in the Mid-East?
So how does this relate to the Israeli situation (as you appear to be trying to stear it away from that in bringing this up...)
Huh, how? I don't have a plan here, I don't think.
Well, since the Jews, many of which were already living in the geographical region sometimes refered to as Palestine, were able to form an actual government, build infrastructure, and create a fledgling democracy in a sea of sheiks and dictators, more power to them. If the land is so-called Palestinian land, why did they not form a government, or build any infrastructure to support a population on this sacred land of theirs? Why is there no historical record in any forum of a Nation of Palestine? Why did even their neighbours cast them out and why to this day do they slum in refugee camps in Syria, Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan? Why do their brothers not take these blessed people in? You see, like the Indians, they were not organized, skilled, disciplined or wise. They were too busy killing each other off to notice that the land they had tried run the Jews off of for over a thousand years in the name of Allah was being taken back from their wretched hands.
I didn't say they weren't stupid, un-educated, undisciplined, un-organized, or otherwise unprepared. I'm just saying they were robbed. And they're pissed about it. Just because you left your car unlocked and your stereo gets stolen doesn't mean you have no right to try and get it back does it?
Funny how their neighbours didn't give two flying squirrels about 'Palestine' until it suits their needs. Oh, and I assume then that you will be signing over the deed of your house to the local casino, correct?
That is telling as to some of the motives behind the situation.
As for the deed, hell no. And if the indians rose up tomorrow to try to take it from me I'd fight them for it. My point is this. Whether we like it or not, the PA has a beef here same as the Indians, and same as the Irish.
Ok, so there homeland may not have had the name Israel at the time, but where was it and how large of a area was their homeland? I venture to guess it was much larger than present day Israel. So, who is going to give up the land that really belongs to the Jews/
W R O N G !
They trace their lineage to this area for millenia.
No problem by me. But your gross ignorance of the creation of the State of Israel is not a reason to float this garbage around, masquerading it as a "reasonable and fair" view of the situations. In my next post, I will be happy to plug a few historical links. The history is too long to be posted here.
The Arabs were given what was thought to be separate, but equal. That was not good enough, they wanted it all.
If it was as two-sided as you say there would be no problem would there? No one asked them if they would mind if some of their land was turned into an Israeli state (which I'm sure didn't sit well in the first place) it was mandated. I'm sure this had a lot to do with no real gubment to whom the request would have surely been made. Then the scattered Jews were invited to return to their "ansestral lands" right? So, the current occupants were left with a choice stay and live with a people they have been brainwashed to hate, be forced out (as many were) when they decided to stay, or pick up and move. Not a great choice either way you look at it. I'd be pissed too.
But thanks for clearing up a lot of the things I didn't know. /non-sarcasm
Here is an example of some of the process in land purchasing and land issue in that area:
Other instances of purchased land by the Jews in the Mandate. Arab money lenders foreclosing on fellaheen. Jews purchased the land and paid the debts of the fellaheen (Arieh L. Avneri, The Claim of Dispossession (1984), p. 207):
The fellaheen of Taiyibe, Tira, Tamra and Na'ura had mortaged their lands to money lenders, mostly the family of Abd el-Hadi. Gradually the mortagagees acquired title to large portions of the land. The situation became critical. The fellaheen were unable to repay their loans and there was an immediate danger that they would lose all their land. In order to get free of the oppressive moneylenders they sought to sell part of their holding, a tract of 50,000 dunam.
They turned to Hankin and offered to sell the land to the Jewish National Fund, if it would undertake to pay their debts. The Jewish National Fund bought these lands during the years 1936-39. The fellaheen escaped the embrace of the moneylenders...
Many of the landowners in the Mandate who sold land to the Jews were not even "Palestinians". Ex: (Avneri, p. 201) Most of the land in the Hills of Naftali was the property of absentee owners, residents of Syria and Lebanon. In March 1940 Nahmani made a survey of the holdings of landowners who were not Palestinian citizens. He found they owned a total of 83,467 dunam in the Districts of Safed and Tiberias, 26,000 dunam in the Safed District and 7,000 dunam in the Tiberias District were owned by Circassians, Druse, Iranians and Germans. None of these landowners were citizens of Palestine. .....Ahmed Mardini, a Kurd from Damascus, owned 2,200 dunam; Hassan Farah, a Christian from Marj Iyun, owned 2,000 dunam; and 520 dunam were owned by Abdullah Khuri and the heirs of Shahadrin Khuri, all of whom were from Lebanon...The village of Malkiya, comprising 765 dunam, was owned by the heirs of Hussein Sulayman Buza, Moslem Kurds living in Damascus, and was sold to the Jewish National Fund....[etc.]
Avneri gives one example of the benefit the Jews brought to the land in purchasing these tracts of land (p. 207-08) The P.I.C.A. [Jewish Agency involved in land puchases] owned 2,354 dunam in the village of Tira. It had bought the land many years previously, but had never extablished a Jewish settlement there, and it was being worked by tenant farmers. In 1946 the Jewish National Fund bought the land and undertook to indemnify the tenant farmers. It paid them LP. 6,097 as a compensation and also bought their houses and adjoining gardens for an additional LP. 9,548. The fellaheen who remained in Tira as neighbors to the Jewish settlers gained a further major benefit when malaria was eradicated from the area. Two years before the land was bought in Tira, Dr. Sliternik, the head of the Jewish Agency's Health Department, visited the village with a view to planning for the eradication of the disease. He found that..."almost all the villagers suffered from malaria....The danger is redoubled because of the many swamps in the area, over which we have no control or supervision...." Once the tract was bought the swamps were drained, and the Jewish and Arab settlements were freed from the disease.
The fellaheen of the above-mentioned villages had lived on the land for many generations and had struck roots in the villages. Not so with the fellaheen of the Mugrabi villages. Half their lands were owned by emirs, descendants of exiles who had accompanied Abd el-Kader, who for the most part were living in Syria.
Many moderate Arabs (finally silenced after the Mufti led Islamic riots of 1936-39) sold the land to the Jews despite the hypocritical threats of other pan-Arab nationalists. Ex.: (Avneri, p. 209):
The Fahum family of Nazareth sold the Fund [Jewish Nationalist Fund] a 3,000-dunam tract of land "in fee simple and free of tenant farmers." The head of the family, Yussuf Fahum, who was mayor of Nazareth for a time, sold his land despite terrorist threats. According to the Jewish National Fund functionaries who dealt with him, he was a proud man and he despised the hypocritical Arab public figures who sold land to Jews in secret and then gave vent to extreme nationalist utterances. He effected the sale openly and publicly without resorting to intermediaries or fictive owners.
No, that "whose distant, distant, distant ancestors have the better claim?" stuff just won't do it.
The problem with the 'moral equivalence' folks is that the Israelis try (so far as I can tell) to focus on those dirtbags causing the problem, while the Palestinians seek out innocents at pizza parlors and the like. I carry no water for the people who self-identify as Jews. I am not going to make a title search to that land. The Brits probably made a mistake putting them into the middle of Arab land in 1919. But no one else wanted to take them -- and here's a flash --they're there and have been for 80 years.
And I am sorry but I cannot sympathize with suicide bombers who seek out kids and civilians. I am with the Jews now. Let them off the leash. Last one standing gets the land.
I see they have the same type of politicians over there that we get over here.
On another note. I see the dates are before re-colonization began (1948 right) so were these actaully transfers of title or what? If they had title to sell how was it listed, such and such location, such and such acreage, In the country to Be named? I thought that by the logic posted here they didn't actually own land because they weren't contained within an established gubments boundries.
For many years, the moshava Hadera, whose lands had been bought in 1891, was not troubled by land disputes and by claims of displaced people. In 1929, the neighboring Arabs began filing claims on lands that the moshava, had allegedly stolen from them. The Arabs from Fuqara filed a claim for 5,000 dunam; those from Arab ed-Demair claimed 150 dunam; and the Nufeiat Arabs seized a tract of 1,200 dunam. The latter claimed that the land belonged to them, and they were adamant in their refusal to leave. The claims of the Fuqara and el-Damair Arabs were disallowed in court. The trial on the claim of the Nufeiat Bedouins was held on July 24-31, 1930. The Court found against them. They appealed, and a Court of Appeals with A. Plunkett, 'Ali Hasne Effendi and A. De Frites as judges heard the case. Judgment was rendered in Nablus on December 5, 1930 denying the appeal. A copy of the decision was forwarded to the Colonial Office, which received ongoing information on the situation in the country in general, and especially on the cases before the Land Court. The Nufeiat Bedouins, according to the P.E.F. Map of 1878, were totally new to the area north of Hadera - they had been encamped south of the Wadi Hawarith. Nevertheless they persisted in claiming that the land sold in 1891 belonged to them. The Bedouins might have abandoned their claim, had it not been for the support of the Waqf and the Supreme Muslim Council [political Islamic organs during the British Mandate].
Another methodology of the Arabs, in their attempt to rewrite history on the ground and extort the land from the Jews would occur, especially in Urban areas, when the rich Urban Arab absentee landlords would sell land to the Jews. What occurred was that the Arabs would sell the land in legitimate transactions to the Jews and the Arab landlord would then encourage and foment other Arabs to attack the Jews with the hopeful expectation the Jews would vacate the newly purchased land. Avneri describes the typical scenario (p.179):
The Arabs never charged that the Jewish urban community in any way interfered with the development of the Arab towns or that it displaced Arabs from the existing towns. The reason no such charge was made was that the city plots sold to the Jews were sold by rich urban Arabs, who were often themselves the spokesmen of the Arab nationalist movement. Some had even organized the gangs of hoodlums who attacked the Jewish quarters in the cities - the very sections which they themselves had sold to the Jews.
Many times the Arabs simply did not respect the rule of law and blatantly flouted it notwithstanding the legitimate land purchases by the Jews. Example (p. 188):
The Government had sold land in Ashrafiya to some prominent Arab families who could prove, as it were, that they had previously owned the land in the area. In 1929 the P.I.C.A. (Jewish Committee involved in land purchasing) bought 2,000 dunam of land from these families. The Jewish National Fund acquired an additional 4,300 dunam. During the period of the riots [1936-39 Grand Mufti led Arab Islamic riots against Jews, British, and moderate Arabs] local Arabs seized theses tracts of land and held them. In 1940, after the seige on Jewish settlements had been lifted, the P.I.C.A. and the Jewish National Fund sought to reassert their lawful ownership. The Arab squatters made various claims to title and to alleged rights in the real property. Their claims were heard, as was customary, in the land court, and were all disallowed. The Jews, pursuant to the Court's finding, sought to plow the lands, but the Arabs did all they could to hinder them and refused to leave the area in dispute.
The beneficiaries to State owned land from the British, were largely the Arabs. The British had sold scant State owned land to the Jews which clearly was in abrogation of Article 6 of the Mandate. However, to give you an idea of how the Arabs squandered a lot of this land and were unable, unlike the Jews, to bring life from the land, in the end giving up and selling the land to the Jews, Avneri gives one example (pp. 187-188):
The Arab National Company of Nablus was one of the beneficiaries of the Government's generous land grants in the Beit-Shean Valley. It received a tract of 1,200 dunam for intensive cultivation, to serve as a model for the Bedouins in the Valley. At the same time that the Arab leadership was carrying on its violent struggle against the Jews, other Arab leaders sought to evolve a constructive policy, which would not only prevent the sale of land to Jews but would improve the lot of the fellah as well. Thus the Arab People's Fund and the Arab National Company provided the fellaheen with instructors to teach them how to grow bananas. The crops failed. The fellaheen, on the advice of their instructors, uprooted the bananas and planted citrus goves, and also tried to raise vegetables. These projects failed as well. In the end these lands were sold to the Jewish National Fund.
Arafat had the opportunity to take a good deal from Barak, including a significant concessions of of territory occupied by Israel since the 1967 war. He chose not to take the offer, his rhetoric has conditioned his followers to reject any compromise. He's in an untenable situation. If he had accepted the compromise deal, he would have faced revolt from his followers. But in rejecting the deal and ratcheting up the level of violence, he's put his followers into a postion that they cannot win. As the polarization continues, there will be less and less support for negotiations from the Israeli's, and eventually, this violence will provoke an all out war that the Palestinians cannot win. It's ugly, it's brutal, and it will get far worse before it will get better.
But the fact is, the state of Isreal DOES exist. And the State of Israel has the right to defend itself against those who would attack it's citizens. The Israeli government has shown significantly more restraint than I would have anticipated, and I think the tide of world opinion is turning against the Palestinians. It was up to Arafat to prove he was a visonary leader, not just another politician. He failed.
Palestinians are the ones who have no right to be there! And they continue to remain in the region causing murder and mayhem because of politics not any justifiable ties to the region.
As far as title/grants and such... I don't know how it was recorded, or who kept the records. I just gave you the quickly available references to the fact that the Palestinians were not "thrown" off the land.
What you probably don't know is that in 1948, when the entire Arab world was declaring war on Israel, with the combined armies at the borders, a WHOLE LOT of "Palestinians" who were living in Israel CHOSE to leave the country to avoid the war. They did not stay to fight, but cast their lot with their "brothers". It was "obvious" to those Palestinians that the Israeli's would be wipe off the face of the earth in a few days, and they would be able to return and claim not only thier land back, but also the posessions of the dead Jews.
To that I say... "You don't stay to fight, you don't get the land". I have no sympathy for those Palestinians who cast their lot with the wrong side. They abandoned the land, no way should they get it back by crying and whining.
As far as the 1967 borders... Israel did not start that war... but they did finish it. That is how land is gained or lost. So, they Palestinians or ANY of the arab states have no claim on that land at all... I have no idea why the world is putting up with the Saudi plan. If that were the case, then we will need to redraw all the national borders in all the world, since they all came from land aquisition thorugh warfare.
I am tired of you.
In the ovens of death camps? That is what Tacis meant. The tragedy is that this war brings the worst out of both sides (and sometimes out of spectators).
Yes the Israeli State does exist. Yes, Israel does have a right to defend itself. Yes, more restraint than I would have shown. And yes, the palestinians are burrning bridges faster than they can build them. Question, hypothetically removing suicide bombings mind you, do you think that the palestinians have a right to attempt to retake the land? Do you think they have a legitimate complaint? That is what I have been spouting about this whole thread. Do they have a legitimate beef?
Is there the Israeli nation if Jewish nation exists?
It is quite possible that I interpreted your response wrongly... it seemed to me that you were not "genuine".
In any case... yes, I think that is exactly what they did. Some sold their land (and were proud of it), while others gave it up with the expectation of the Israeli defeat. They are now crying foul because they bet on the wrong horse.
Please continue to educate yourself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.