Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: EBUCK
To give you an idea of the duplicitiousness by many Arabs in and around the Palestine (either under the Ottoman Empire or the British) with respect to the issue of "displacement", Arieh L. Avneri, in his excellent book, The Claim of Dispossession(1984), gives a typical example of what happened when the Jews made legitimate purchases of land and were faced with false claims of dispossession (pp. 153-154):

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.

83 posted on 03/27/2002 2:34:44 PM PST by besieged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]


To: besieged
So, you and others apparently, think that the Arabs gave up their land then cried foul afterwords in an attempt to stir the pot so to speak? Heck of a lot of trouble to go thru. for what purpose?

EBUCK

87 posted on 03/27/2002 2:41:30 PM PST by EBUCK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson