The Israel Palestine Primer

Some of you helped me with a request a couple of days ago for some links to primary sources regarding Israel– I specifically was looking for sources describing that geographical area during the latter years of the Ottoman Empire. The whole point was to give a list of mostly primary sources showing that the common narratives regarding Palestine and Israel (that there even was a Palestine, or a Palestinian People, prior to the creation of Israel, for one) are completed and utter fabrications.

For those who want to know about the area prior to Israel, the creation of Israel, and a bit of commentary on all of it, here’s the list of primary and secondary sources I created:
[Photo of Jerusalem by National Geographic]
jerusalem-city-night_2153_600x450
Primary Sources:

Descriptions of the area known as Palestine in the latter days of the Ottoman Empire:

Mark Twain’s Innocents Abroad: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/3176

Gustav Flaubert on Jerusalem in 1850: http://books.google.com/books?id=w0mml-378QQC&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=Gustave+Flaubert+holy+land&source=bl&ots=DkB4tbVSNI&sig=cm9fGQcWqZnvI8DNoLZPclGFwts&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mzjVU-aCLpCXyATEloKADg&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=Gustave%20Flaubert%20holy%20land&f=false

Lamartine Describes Jerusalem and the surrounding land circa 1835: http://books.google.com/books?id=GSYOAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=Jerusalem&f=false

Jordan under Ottoman Rule (according to the King of Jordan’s website– the geographical area known as “Palestine” was at the time a part of what is now Jordan): http://www.kinghussein.gov.jo/his_ottoman.html


 

The Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/sykes.asp

Map of Sykes-Picot Divisions: http://www.crethiplethi.com/the-sykes-picot-agreement-1916/historical-documents/2009/

The Balfour Declaration: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/balfour.asp

The White Paper of 1922: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/brwh1922.asp

Text of the Mandate for Palestine: http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/2FCA2C68106F11AB05256BCF007BF3CB

(it is interesting that this document is not included in the Yale resources)

English Translation of Hamas Charter: http://www.palestine-studies.org/files/pdf/jps/1734.pdf

(The Charters for Fatah and the PLO are even worse, but since Hamas is the current leader of this, I’m just linking to theirs)


 

Well-Sourced Secondary Sources:

http://www.mythsandfacts.org/conflict/mandate_for_palestine/mandate_for_palestine.htm

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/theres-something-very-ugly-in-this-rage-against-israel/15400#.U9BkwkAXIsv

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p389_John.html

This is a long read, going into the decades of politics behind the Balfour Declaration. I recommend it for those facts, but disagree with some of the conclusions, based as they are in some erroneous understanding of the geographic area of Palestine under Ottoman rule, and the initial settlement of that region just after the Declaration (the the article below from The Blaze for more information).


 

Secondary to Tertiary Sources, or other commentary:

http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2014/07/25/the-one-passage-on-the-history-of-the-arab-israeli-conflict-that-the-mainstream-media-will-never-print/

Only because most of the article is direct quotes from primary sources– newpapers. But those sources are essential for understanding what is behind the claim that the “Israelis evicted the Palestinians”

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/p/eozs-psychological-history-of.html#.U9U_oqNuozR

This guy admits right out the front that a lot of what he writes is speculative in nature. However, it’s also the first time I’ve seen something that made some manner of sense out of a culture in which “Hudna” and “Taqquiya” are considered virtuous. Part of the problem in the West is that a lot of us ignorantly assume that everyone else on the planet is just like we are, that every culture extolls the same things as virtuous and condemns the same things as villainous, but this simply isn’t so. The author of this shows why that misapprehension skews our understanding of things over there so much. Finally, it puts things like the Hamas Charter into a cultural context that is understandable.

A Couple Blogs of interest:

http://www.israellycool.com/

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/


It is my hope that the above linked information can be a useful primer in the subject of “What the heck is going on over there?!”

This post was originally published here on 27 July 2014.  This is a repost with no changes except art added.

Advertisements

About zmalfoy

Z. Malfoy is a practicing Catholic-with-an-"interesting"-past. She earned her Bachelor's Degree in Music Education (Spec. Voice) from Loyola University New Orleans, and has since taken a few business courses to expand her knowledge base. In her free time, she studies belly-dance, alchemy, theology, and various skills related to self-sufficiency. She also enjoys reading science fiction, refreshing her French, and watching anime. She recently started with learning Krav Maga and Russian.
This entry was posted in Education, Islam, Politics, Prayer, War. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to The Israel Palestine Primer

  1. Love the resources! Thanks, Zoph!

  2. Not directly related. But fun. 😀
    Jews, tired of amplified muslim calls to prayer in the middle of the night, launch audio counterattack.
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/183405#.U9bCr1a99KN

  3. ” I recommend it for those facts, but disagree with some of the conclusions, based as they are in some erroneous understanding of the geographic area of Palestine under Ottoman rule, and the initial settlement of that region just after the Declaration” 

    Great post Z! Could you elaborate on what was seen or state as erroneous understanding? I must have missed that and would like to understand what you see that was understood as wrong. Thank you.

    • zmalfoy says:

      While I completely agree that much of the politics behind the founding of Israel for several decades was very hinky (the reason I liked that link and included it, because it’s great detail and context), the author makes the assumptions that 1) The area of Palestine prior to the State of Israel was anything other than an impovershed wasteland already populated with many Jews and their Arab employees and 2) That when the State of Israel was founded, that the Israelis evicted the Arabs living in the region.

      These assumptions are understandable as they have been widely held for many decades and the focus of this particular article was on the politics (mainly) in Europe and the Americas.

      This is why I wanted to include the descriptions of Israel in the latter days of the Ottoman Empire– to show what that geographic area was like prior to Israel’s re-founding. Likewise, although the primary articles are hard to find, The Blaze article quotes some newspaper accounts of the time showing that it was not the Jews that evicted the Arabs at all, but rather that they were convinced by their Muslim co-religionists to flee the area to allow them to kill the Jews unhindered by concern for Muslims in the line of fire. Point of Note, here– in 1939 there was a Palestine Pavillion in the NY World’s Fair. It was built and staffed entirely by (Zionist) Jews because, at that time, the only people in the entire world who identified themselves as “Palestinian” were, in fact, the Jews of Palestine. (Maybe some of the Christians. Maybe.) The Arabs considered themselves, if anything, just Arab. Maybe Syrian. But mostly Arab.

      This is my only beef with this particular article–> where the conclusions include a priori assumptions regarding historical record that are not, in fact, true. However, the rest of it is great. Kinda.. . looooooong. . .. but great

      Do I agree that the politics were sketchy at best? Yes.

      Do I think that many states signed on to the idea because they were more concerned with kicking out their own Jewish populations than they were about any possible consequences? Yep.

      Do I think that the re-founding of Israel was a mistake? No. I find it very interesting to note that the area now called Israel has only ever bloomed, only ever been green, for the Jews. Not for any other people. This speaks to me. And if the Arabs can’t handle that, then they are the ones with the problem.All told, that area is much, much better off with Israel than it is without. Too bad Hamas and their ilk cannot accept that.

      So. . . that’s my long winded answer. ^_^

      • Knight4GFC says:

        “A priori”… nice adjective! 🙂

        “1) The area of Palestine prior to the State of Israel was anything other than an impoverished wasteland already populated with many Jews and their Arab employees…” No, I did not have the time to go through all of your historical sources/links… so here’s my question: Do you have any valid historical references to this statement of yours? I would definitely like to know.

        “These assumptions are understandable as they have been widely held for many decades and the focus of this particular article was on the politics (mainly) in Europe and the Americas…” Yes, absolutely. And the author stated certain facts supporting why he came to these assumptions. “On a day-to-day level, we can look in our newspapers for Zionist tactics of influence and leverage which we can document they have used successfully in the past…(read more here – Triumph and Tragedy http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p389_John.html).” But the author does exactly what he claims of the Zionists, “tactics of influence and leverage.” The author begins to go through the list of the facts of Zionist influence on people, particularly America and Europe, trying to convince you, the reader, that his assumption is indeed factual.

        “Point of Note, here– in 1939 there was a Palestine Pavillion in the NY World’s Fair. It was built and staffed entirely by (Zionist) Jews because, at that time, the only people in the entire world who identified themselves as “Palestinian” were, in fact, the Jews of Palestine. (Maybe some of the Christians. Maybe.) The Arabs considered themselves, if anything, just Arab. Maybe Syrian. But mostly Arab.” Although I completely agree with you here, one could say that this only happened because the Zionists Jews were the only ones trying to claim the area of Palestine as there own, regardless of who claimed they were “Palestinian”, or who was there locally. Both Jews and Arabs resided there ( you mentioned “Arab employees”). Yes, the “Palestinians” that showed up in 1983, was long after the act. Who the majority there was locally, does not matter. It comes down to literally, “right of conquest.” Yes, the Zionists were the ones in power, made the “noise,” moved first, and won. With that said, it is not hard to believe the newspaper accounts you spoke of, that said; “it was not the Jews that evicted the Arabs at all, but rather that they were convinced by their Muslim co-religionists to flee the area to allow them to kill the Jews unhindered by concern for Muslims in the line of fire.”

        “All told, that area is much, much better off with Israel than it is without.” I AGREES. May it continue to be so.

        • zmalfoy says:

          Knight,

          Thank you for your excellent comment! And now that you’ve given me this opening, I’m going to blather on for a bit, to expand some of my thoughts mentioned above:

          1) Define “valid”. LOL, okay, so that’s why I included the links at the top. We have 3 travelogues all dating from the 1800’s and the King of Jordan’s own website. I like the Mark Twain because there’s no chance of translation error, being in modern English. To show that it isn’t a thing out of context, I added the links to the writings of Flaubert and Lamartine (as mentioned by our lovely Frenchreader). I added His Majesty’s website as well because he himself is an Arab. All four sources agree that during the latter days of the Ottoman Empire, the entire area was impoverished. The descriptions from the travelogues show a dry, desolate, mostly empty land. Jerusalem has a notable population, but there are not many people at all coming or going– that is to say, very little in the way of commerce. (I must confess, I found the Lamartine description to be a bit eerie).

          2) Yep. And yes, I would even agree that there is great zionist influence in America (I use the little “z” to distinguish a general idea and sentiment from more conspiratorial things). This is due, I theorize, to a reaction to the Holocaust (which, imo, woke a lot of people up to the real and pervasive evil of anti-semitism) and also the very strong influence of Evangelical Christianity upon popular American thought. From what I’ve seen, Jews really don’t understand that second part, and are pretty confused about it. They may appreciate it, but they really don’t understand it at all (which is why, I think, they tend to be so suspicious about it). This is not something coming from Jewish Propaganda, this is something coming from wholly Christian sources. I mean, look at the story of Walid Shoebat. Palestinian Terrorists are the last people I would expect to be swayed by “Zionist Propaganda”. Yet, there he is.

          I would like to mention, for the purposes of this discussion (for those that may come to this later), that the subject article of this particular comment thread was written, IIRC, in the later 1960s. However, newspaper (and other) accounts from the late 1940s and early 1950s tell a completely different story. For instance:

          In the Economist (London) October 1, 1948, it is written: “Of the 62,000 Arabs who formerly lived in Haifa not more than 5,000 or 6,000 remained. Various factors influenced their decision to seek safety in flight. There is but little doubt that the most potent of the factors were the announcements made over the air by the Higher Arab Executive, urging the Arabs to quit.. . . It was clearly intimated that those Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades.” [emphasis mine]

          Likewise American journalist Kenneth Bilbly writes, circa 1949: “The Arab exodus, initially at least, was encouraged by many Arab leaders, such as Haj Amin el Husseini, the exiled pro-Nazi Mufti of Jerusalem, and by the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine. They viewed the first wave of Arab setbacks as merely transitory. Let the Palestine Arabs flee into neighboring countries. It would serve to arouse the other Arab peoples to greater effort, and when the Arab invasion struck, the Palestinians could return to their homes and be compensated with the property of Jews driven into the sea.” [New Star in the Near East (New York, 1950), pp. 30-31]

          In 1952, the Arab Higher Committee wrote to the Arab League: Some of the Arab leaders and their ministers in Arab capitals . . . declared that they welcomed the immigration of Palestinian Arabs into the Arab countries until they saved Palestine. Many of the Palestinian Arabs were misled by their declarations…. It was natural for those Palestinian Arabs who felt impelled to leave their country to take refuge in Arab lands . . . and to stay in such adjacent places in order to maintain contact with their country so that to return to it would be easy when, according to the promises of many of those responsible in the Arab countries (promises which were given wastefully), the time was ripe. Many were of the opinion that such an opportunity would come in the hours between sunset and sunrise.”

          It is not until the late 1950’s- early 1960’s that anyone starts saying anything about the Jews kicking out the Arabs (Which now makes me wonder where all those Arab Israelis came from?). By the time the subject article was written, historians had adopted the “Expulsion” narrative whole-heartedly. This subject is still being debated quite vehemently. However, while I know that every group of people promotes their own propaganda, and often twists or manipulates facts to do so (no less we in the US than many others), I do know that there is one side in this conflict that does not have the rock-solid moral commitment to honesty as part of both religion and Code of Honor. In fact, there is only one group involved here that has Deceit and Lying advocated and endorsed by their religious scripture– for this reason, I am doubly suspicious and skeptical of anything written or promoted by that side.

          While I concede that the Deir Yassin Massacre (An event that was immediately condemned by the Haganah and the rest of the Israelis) probably had a fair amount to do with a lot of people leaving, I do not think it can be rightly argued that everyone fled because of it. I think it was part of the mix. I would liken it to 9/11 and the Patriot Act/ Creation of the Dept. of Homeland Security. One despicable event was used to prod people to act in a certain way, but the “effect” did not necessarily naturally flow from the proposed “cause”.

          3) Regarding the NY Worlds Fair: I think my point (look at me trying to figure out my own thinking. Criminy . . .) was that there was no “Palestinian People” at that time, at least not the way that most people tend to think. Much like people who live in the Sahara or the Rockies don’t generally say “I’m Saharan” or “I’m Rockish”– they say “I’m Algerian” or “I’m Coloradan”, or they say “I’m African” or “Muslim” or “American” or “Irish-American”. Likewise, of those living in the Palestine area, people would say “I’m Syrian” or “Trans-Jordanian” or usually “Arab”, unless they were Jews, in which case the Jews who lived in the Palestine region would sometimes identify as Palestinian (as opposed to Sephardi or Ashkenazi) . . . so the idea that “The Palestinian People were kicked out and their land stolen by the Jews who suddenly arrived and had never been there before. . .”<– that's what I dispute and am trying to illustrate with that little note. A lot of people believe this, I and think they're completely wrong.

          I want to add, Knight, you have one excellent point that I totally agree with but so many people wouldn't even understand: Right of Conquest.

          Amen, brother! No matter what happened before, it is age old understanding that that any territory taken during military operations becomes part of the conquering entity in some fashion or another, as territory, protectorate, something). This was the rule, with no exceptions that I can think of, across the globe and across time, until the ending of WWII. The idea of the US leaving Japan, of the old empires leaving their colonies. . . this was radical and new (And, I would posit, not always to the betterment of the people living in those lands). The idea of Right of Conquest goes back to the earliest civilizations– one can only claim what one can effectively defend. By all the Rules of War that have existed since there even was war, Israel should include the entire Sinai Peninsula, and all the land from the Dead Sea to the Mediterranean.

          People these days, though, seem to think that borders are oppressive and war is always evil. People these days are spoiled little idiots.

          If there is one thing I think the Israelis have done wrong, more than once, it’s give up land to try to “buy peace”. It was never going to work, and it never will, and they should never have allowed themselves to be pressured into it. (by the US, and others).

          My goodness, look at me, going on! Thank you, Knight, for giving me an opportunity to blather on like a nerd! My thought in writing all this out, here, was to show some thought-process–while above I list my sources but not a lot of my thought, this was a nice chance to show some of that.

          • Knight4GFC says:

            It is I who should thank you for the brain-lobe-exorcise-inducing response… and I do! However, you are very welcome Lady Z! I too can be considered, at times, a… “semi-nerd.” 🙂 You did not blather one bit.

            “This is not something coming from Jewish Propaganda… …Palestinian Terrorists are the last people I would expect to be swayed by ‘…Zionist Propaganda’. Yet, there he is.” Yeah, really. I definitely agree with you.

            “I do know that there is one side in this conflict that does not have the rock-solid moral commitment to honesty as part of both religion and Code of Honor. In fact, there is only one group involved here that has Deceit and Lying advocated and endorsed by their religious scripture…” Isn’t that the truth!

            “Right of Conquest.

            Amen, brother! No matter what happened before, it is age old understanding that that any territory taken during military operations becomes part of the conquering entity in some fashion or another, as territory, protectorate, something…” It NATURALLY becomes your responsibility after “taking control.” One would certainly not let that which is “won” rot. You would care for, and preserve, that, for your own. Otherwise, why “take” it (out of want, need, or lust) in the first place? This is why, the troops that fought hard and won, have such a trying time when, that, which they fought for and won, is “given away” and “lost” again to the same situation they saved it from. Pretty crazy, huh? I definitely share the same thought you shared here: “If there is one thing I think the Israelis have done wrong, more than once, it’s give up land to try to ‘buy peace’. It was never going to work, and it never will, and they should never have allowed themselves to be pressured into it. (by the US, and others).” Hmmph! “Spoiled little idiots” indeed!

            Ahh… this has been mentally stimulating for me. Thank you again Lady Z! 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s