School speech pathologist fired for refusing to sign Israel oath

[Arctish]

There were plenty of Jews living there for a long time, also. The real trouble started when they refused to accept being second class citizens.

Are you ready to continue our discussion of life for Jews under the Ottoman Empire and the British Mandate for Palestine?

I can revive the thread or start a new one.

 

[Arctish]

The Palestinians were actually living there and had been for years.

The Zionists were intruders.

With a book of magic claiming some god gave them the land a while back.

There were plenty of Jews living there for a long time, also. The real trouble started when they refused to accept being second class citizens.

No there weren't.

Actually there were. They comprised approximately 10% of the population in Palestine in the first decade of the 20th century. They were loyal to the Ottoman Turks and were protected by them.

The madness of Zionism begins in the late 1800's.

The only reason the Jews got a country was because of what happened in WWII. They never deserved one.

Their magic book gives them no rational claims to anything.

Zionist immigration caused the Jewish population to grow explosively during the Mandate years, so much so that Jews comprised approximately 30% of the population by the time WWII started. Even worse, the immigrants made it abundantly clear they saw all of Palestine as rightfully theirs and intended to take it by force.

The UN Partition Plan that gave the largely immigrant Jews half of Palestine was so grossly unfair to the Palestinians it's hard to justify, even for Zionists, except as 'payment' for what Jews had suffered in Europe, as if that makes any sense. Even Loren struggles to explain why the Negev Desert was awarded to Israel.

 

[Derec]

Zionist immigration caused the Jewish population to grow explosively during the Mandate years, so much so that Jews comprised approximately 30% of the population by the time WWII started. Even worse, the immigrants made it abundantly clear they saw all of Palestine as rightfully theirs and intended to take it by force.

There was also a lot of Arab immigration into cis-Jordan as well. So much so, that official rules for status of "Palestinian refugee" includes those Arabs whose ancestors lived in cis-Jordan between June 1st 1946 and May 15th 1948 to account to the influx of new Arab residents during the Mandate period.

The UN Partition Plan that gave the largely immigrant Jews half of Palestine

Actually "Mandatory Palestine" included both cis- and trans-Jordan and Arabs got all of trans-Jordan (which became known as just Jordan). Therefore, Arabs got vast majority of the territory. Even if Jews had gotten all of cis-Jordan (as was the plan before the UN partition plan), Arab trans-Jordan is still significantly bigger.

Remember, the term "Palestinian" in those days was merely a toponym, and did not denote a supposed ethnicity. That only happened after PLO invented Palestinians as a supposedly distinct people in the 60s.

 

[Arctish]

Zionist immigration caused the Jewish population to grow explosively during the Mandate years, so much so that Jews comprised approximately 30% of the population by the time WWII started. Even worse, the immigrants made it abundantly clear they saw all of Palestine as rightfully theirs and intended to take it by force.

There was also a lot of Arab immigration into cis-Jordan as well. So much so, that official rules for status of "Palestinian refugee" includes those Arabs whose ancestors lived in cis-Jordan between June 1st 1946 and May 15th 1948 to account to the influx of new Arab residents during the Mandate period.

Do you have any sources that give an approximate increase in terms of percent of total population? How does it compare to the influx of Jewish immigrants?

The UN Partition Plan that gave the largely immigrant Jews half of Palestine

Actually "Mandatory Palestine" included both cis- and trans-Jordan and Arabs got all of trans-Jordan (which became known as just Jordan). Therefore, Arabs got vast majority of the territory. Even if Jews had gotten all of cis-Jordan (as was the plan before the UN partition plan), Arab trans-Jordan is still significantly bigger.

Remember, the term "Palestinian" in those days was merely a toponym, and did not denote a supposed ethnicity. That only happened after PLO invented Palestinians as a supposedly distinct people in the 60s.

That's an interesting caption on that map. "Originally all of Mandatory Palestine was designated to be a homeland for the Jews". That is exactly why the indigenous, non-Jewish population (90% of the total population) rejected the plan. They wanted self-government now that the Empire was gone, not be subjects of another, even more foreign Empire that was trying to cram a Jewish State full of illegal immigrants down their throats.

Do you want to talk about Palestine during the decline of the Ottoman Empire and the British Mandate years? I can start another thread.

 

[Derec]

That's an interesting caption on that map. "Originally all of Mandatory Palestine was designated to be a homeland for the Jews". That is exactly why the indigenous, non-Jewish population (90% of the total population) rejected the plan.

What's your definition of "indigenous"? Is it like the UNRWA definition where 2 years between 1946 and 1948 is enough for perpetual refugee status of all your descendants? As long as you are Arab of course.

They wanted self-government now that the Empire was gone, not be subjects of another, even more foreign Empire that was trying to cram a Jewish State full of illegal immigrants down their throats.

Illegal immigrants? How so? There was no state at the time whose immigration laws were violated. Only a British protectorate which has declared a plan to form a Jewish homeland. If the Jewish immigrants acted in accordance with the Balfour Declaration, how are they "illegally" entering the British Protectorate whose express purpose was to facilitate creation of a Jewish state?

 

[Arctish]

That's an interesting caption on that map. "Originally all of Mandatory Palestine was designated to be a homeland for the Jews". That is exactly why the indigenous, non-Jewish population (90% of the total population) rejected the plan.

What's your definition of "indigenous"? Is it like the UNRWA definition where 2 years between 1946 and 1948 is enough for perpetual refugee status of all your descendants? As long as you are Arab of course.

They wanted self-government now that the Empire was gone, not be subjects of another, even more foreign Empire that was trying to cram a Jewish State full of illegal immigrants down their throats.

Illegal immigrants? How so? There was no state at the time whose immigration laws were violated. Only a British protectorate which has declared a plan to form a Jewish homeland. If the Jewish immigrants acted in accordance with the Balfour Declaration, how are they "illegally" entering the British Protectorate whose express purpose was to facilitate creation of a Jewish state?

Let's take this discussion to another thread. Or you can just Google 'illegal Jewish immigration into Palestine' and read up on the British efforts to control the rising number of Jewish immigrants intent on making all of Palestine into a Jewish State, like your map says.

 

[ruby sparks]

I explained why they aren't violating international law, you made no attempt to rebut my point.

Lol. Rebut the point made by the great legal scholar Loren Pechtel. Good one.

 

[untermensche]

No there weren't.

Actually there were. They comprised approximately 10% of the population in Palestine in the first decade of the 20th century. They were loyal to the Ottoman Turks and were protected by them.

That's not a lot of Jews.

And it gives Jews the right to 10% of the land.

The madness of Zionism begins in the late 1800's.

The only reason the Jews got a country was because of what happened in WWII. They never deserved one.

Their magic book gives them no rational claims to anything.

Zionist immigration caused the Jewish population to grow explosively during the Mandate years, so much so that Jews comprised approximately 30% of the population by the time WWII started. Even worse, the immigrants made it abundantly clear they saw all of Palestine as rightfully theirs and intended to take it by force.

The UN Partition Plan that gave the largely immigrant Jews half of Palestine was so grossly unfair to the Palestinians it's hard to justify, even for Zionists, except as 'payment' for what Jews had suffered in Europe, as if that makes any sense. Even Loren struggles to explain why the Negev Desert was awarded to Israel.

It is not hard to understand.

It was a gift because the nations that won WWII knew about what the Nazi's were doing to the Jews and did not care.

This was to pretend they did care.

And it was easy to just give away land that belonged to a weak people and had no known oil.

You'd think a god would give his people some land with oil underneath it?

 

[untermensche]

Jordan officially became a nation before Israel.

Jordan was there.

So in 1948 the UN created a map that was thought to be a fair distribution of land between the new-comers, the intruders, the Jews, the crazed Zionists, and the people that had been living there a long time. And the only reason the Jews got anything was because of what happened in WWII. The Jews had no legitimate claim to anything. They got land as a gift.

It does not matter who accepts it or who rejects it.

It is still a fair distribution of land.

The only way Israel legitimately exists is with a fair distribution of land with the Palestinians.

 

[ruby sparks]

The outcome of the Kansas case was a preliminary injunction.

Not according to the report I posted earlier.

 

[Bomb#20]

http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2017_18/measures/documents/summary_hb_2409_2017.pdf

Anti-Israel Boycott; HB 2409
HB 2409 prohibits the State from entering into a contract with any individual or company
engaged in a boycott of Israel. The definition of “boycott” includes the refusal to engage in
commercial relations with persons and entities engaged in business with Israel and Israeli
controlled territories. The State must require written certification from all individuals and
companies with which it enters into contracts for services, supplies, information technology, or
construction that the individual or company is not engaged in a boycott of Israel. ...​

No way was that one ever going to be upheld.

Well we can say it wasn't upheld. And the teacher in Texas might get a similar outcome on the same basis.

For Texas to go the same way on the same basis, either (a) the government would have to decide that "it" means "she", or else (b) the government would have to decide the government can't discriminate against companies on the basis of their political activities. Those seem unlikely outcomes to me.

Note that in Kansas, the law was salvaged, by amending it. It's a sort of compromise. Sole proprietors are exempt, as are other businesses contracting up to a certain financial threshold.

But the reason Kansas needed to water their law down was because it explicitly said "any individual or company". The Texas law in effect started out already watered down.

Looking at the similar case in Kansas that's already gone through the legal system there, it appears that authorities may have to water down the terms of such things so as, for example, to exclude individual, sole proprietors such as her. But I suppose the Texas Courts may not necessarily be bound by decisions made by courts in Kansas, so maybe there will be a different outcome in Texas.

The two cases don't seem all that similar to me. If the courts uphold the current Texas law, that will be similar to the outcome in Kansas. Kansas pushed its luck beyond consistency with SCOTUS precedents; Texas didn't.

 

[James Madison]

The outcome of the Kansas case was a preliminary injunction.

Not according to the report I posted earlier.

To the contrary, the YouTube speaker in your post was addressing the preliminary injunction issued by the district court. The lawsuit in the district court in Kansas proceeded as far as issuing a preliminary injunction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The Palestinians were actually living there and had been for years.

The Zionists were intruders.

With a book of magic claiming some god gave them the land a while back.

There were plenty of Jews living there for a long time, also. The real trouble started when they refused to accept being second class citizens.

No there weren't.

The madness of Zionism begins in the late 1800's.

The only reason the Jews got a country was because of what happened in WWII. They never deserved one.

Their magic book gives them no rational claims to anything.

1) The persecution of Jews long predates the late 1800's.

2) Both side had a fair amount of immigration to the area in the 1800's--1948 period.

As for their claim--it was by their existence. The land was distributed, the majority-Jewish areas (and the basically empty Negev) to Israel, the majority-Arab areas to Palestine. Seems fair to me.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

No there weren't.

Actually there were. They comprised approximately 10% of the population in Palestine in the first decade of the 20th century. They were loyal to the Ottoman Turks and were protected by them.

The madness of Zionism begins in the late 1800's.

The only reason the Jews got a country was because of what happened in WWII. They never deserved one.

Their magic book gives them no rational claims to anything.

Zionist immigration caused the Jewish population to grow explosively during the Mandate years, so much so that Jews comprised approximately 30% of the population by the time WWII started. Even worse, the immigrants made it abundantly clear they saw all of Palestine as rightfully theirs and intended to take it by force.

The UN Partition Plan that gave the largely immigrant Jews half of Palestine was so grossly unfair to the Palestinians it's hard to justify, even for Zionists, except as 'payment' for what Jews had suffered in Europe, as if that makes any sense. Even Loren struggles to explain why the Negev Desert was awarded to Israel.

The population was roughly evenly split, in reality the land was split in favor of the Palestinians as the Negev was pretty much useless at that point. It was given to Israel to make the partition more even when in reality they were being given trash.

 

[untermensche]

No there weren't.

The madness of Zionism begins in the late 1800's.

The only reason the Jews got a country was because of what happened in WWII. They never deserved one.

Their magic book gives them no rational claims to anything.

1) The persecution of Jews long predates the late 1800's.

The Palestinians have never persecuted the Jews. It is amazing how you can see decades of Israeli oppression of the Palestinians as persecution of the Jews.

The nations that border Israel never persecuted the Jews. They tried to throw a violent intruder and thief out.

2) Both side had a fair amount of immigration to the area in the 1800's--1948 period.

The Palestinians were there and expanding.

Crazed Zionists with nothing but a magic book were immigrating.

As for their claim--it was by their existence. The land was distributed, the majority-Jewish areas (and the basically empty Negev) to Israel, the majority-Arab areas to Palestine. Seems fair to me.

Israel had no legitimate claim to exist in the first place. A magic book gives you no legitimate claim.

It was TOTALLY a gift to the Jews because of what happened during WWII. The Jews had no right to anything.

 

[Arctish]

Actually there were. They comprised approximately 10% of the population in Palestine in the first decade of the 20th century. They were loyal to the Ottoman Turks and were protected by them.



Zionist immigration caused the Jewish population to grow explosively during the Mandate years, so much so that Jews comprised approximately 30% of the population by the time WWII started. Even worse, the immigrants made it abundantly clear they saw all of Palestine as rightfully theirs and intended to take it by force.

The UN Partition Plan that gave the largely immigrant Jews half of Palestine was so grossly unfair to the Palestinians it's hard to justify, even for Zionists, except as 'payment' for what Jews had suffered in Europe, as if that makes any sense. Even Loren struggles to explain why the Negev Desert was awarded to Israel.

The population was roughly evenly split, in reality the land was split in favor of the Palestinians as the Negev was pretty much useless at that point. It was given to Israel to make the partition more even when in reality they were being given trash.

The recent immigrants were given land taken from the indigenous resident population, far more than their percent of population could justify. It was a naked land grab that suited Europeans. There was no justice or fairness to it.

And even though I already knew you would go there, I'm still disgusted you dismiss the Bedouin of the Negev Desert as nothing, and call them and their land useless trash. If the Negev was useless to Israel, then Israel should not have taken it, nor kept the Bedouin in designated villages by force, nor kept them off their grazing land, nor taken over their water supplies, nor denied them their human rights, nor continued to discriminate against them to this very day.

 

[Arctish]

The Palestinians have never persecuted the Jews.

This is an extremely important point. Zionist apologists have been dodging it for years even though the Zionist founders of Israel had no qualms discussing it openly.

"Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been antisemitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?" - David Ben-Gurion

The Palestinians did not persecute their Jewish neighbors. The fighting broke out when European Zionists flooded into Palestine with the openly declared intent to create a State in which non-Jews weren't welcome and would not be citizens.

 

[ruby sparks]

The outcome of the Kansas case was a preliminary injunction.

Not according to the report I posted earlier.

To the contrary, the YouTube speaker in your post was addressing the preliminary injunction issued by the district court. The lawsuit in the district court in Kansas proceeded as far as issuing a preliminary injunction.

James, according to the report, the case was dismissed.

 

[ruby sparks]

Did you read the two articles I posted shortly after the one with the YouTube video in it?

 

[ruby sparks]

Little-known fact: The nazis planned to relocate the Jewish population of Europe to Madagascar, starting in 1940 (a million Jews per year was envisaged). The plan was not viable because of the British naval blockade. So the nazis planned to invade and defeat Britain and then commandeer the British Merchant Navy to transport the Jews to Madagascar. But the nazis lost the Battle of Britain and the plan was shelved.