NationStates Jolt Archive

I found an essay written by King Abdullah of Jordan, dating back to 1947, a few months before the Arab-Israeli war. It sheds light on the history of the region. It also makes one realise that the Muslim arabs may have never had a problem with the Jews themselves, but with the Jews who were never in the region at the time and were coming because of a land that belonged to them over 1400 years ago.

I think people should read it. It might allow you to approach the ongoing debate here with a new perspective on the situation. After all... do you think that the Jews who were living there at the time welcomed the other Jews with open arms? Did they welcome the Zionists, or did they side with their Arab neighbours?

As The Arabs See the Jews (http://www.starttherevolution.org/archives/2006/j%20-%20october/AsTheArabsSeeTheJews.htm)

Our position is so simple and natural that we are amazed it should even be questioned. It is exactly the same position you in America take in regard to the unhappy European Jews. You are sorry for them, but you do not want them in your country.

We do not want them in ours, either. Not because they are Jews, but because they are foreigners. We would not want hundreds of thousands of foreigners in our country, be they Englishmen or Norwegians or Brazilians or whatever.

No people on earth have been less "anti-Semitic" than the Arabs. The persecution of the Jews has been confined almost entirely to the Christian nations of the West. Jews, themselves, will admit that never since the Great Dispersion did Jews develop so freely and reach such importance as in Spain when it was an Arab possession.

...the odd belief which apparently persists in America that Palestine has somehow "always been a Jewish land." Recently an American I talked to cleared up this mystery. He pointed out that the only things most Americans know about Palestine are what they read in the Bible. It was a Jewish land in those days, they reason, and they assume it has always remained so.

In 63 BC the Jews were conquered by Roman Pompey, and never again had even the vestige of independence. The Roman Emperor Hadrian finally wiped them out about 135 AD. He utterly destroyed Jerusalem, rebuilt under another name, and for hundreds of years no Jew was permitted to enter it. A handful of Jews remained in Palestine but the vast majority were killed or scattered to other countries, in the Diaspora, or the Great Dispersion. From that time Palestine ceased to be a Jewish country, in any conceivable sense.

This was 1,815 years ago, and yet the Jews solemnly pretend they still own Palestine! If such fantasy were allowed, how the map of the world would dance about!

Italians might claim England, which the Romans held so long. England might claim France, "homeland" of the conquering Normans. And the French Normans might claim Norway, where their ancestors originated. And incidentally, we Arabs might claim Spain, which we held for 700 years.

Many Mexicans might claim Spain, "homeland" of their forefathers. They might even claim Texas, which was Mexican until 100 years ago. And suppose the American Indians claimed the "homeland" of which they were the sole, native, and ancient occupants until only some 450 years ago!

...these Christian nations of the West are asking Palestine-a poor and tiny Moslem country of the East-to accept the entire burden. "We have hurt these people terribly," cries the West to the East. "Won't you please take care of them for us?"

We find neither logic nor justice in this. Are we therefore "cruel and heartless nationalists"?

Those are just some points I found rather interesting.

I think that people should consider reading this. Even if there are Arabs who hate the Jews on completely racist grounds that have nothing to do with this, the original resistance stemmed from this sudden influx of immigrants on a tiny land, no larger than Vermont, and the numbers were overwhelming.

You plop a first world nation into third world surroundings (and third world surroundings that were told they were going to get self-government, I might add), and yeah, people get pissed. 60 years of this, and people get racist. Right now there probably is a lot of anti-semitism (heck, more than probably), but it was in many ways spawned by the creation of Israel itself. The Jewish homeland should have been built somewhere where it would cause less chaos, like in the US.

About time someone defended the Arabs on the recieving end of a Galili... Really!

The Israeli's just came in and said: "Get out of your land, which you've had for hundreds of years, so that we can move in and take over. And you have no choice, because we have a world power backing us."

How would you like it if, say, Canada came in and did that to us? And our government couldn't do shit? Wouldn't you launch insurgent attacks? Wouldn't you become racist against Canadians? Wouldn't your leaders make speechs attacking the Canadians?

Some very valid and valuable points. Though I find it interesting that Israel is the only nation in the area that's not a third world nation. If the Palestians and the Israelis could get along, the Palestinians would be better off than living in any other Arab nation

How would you like it if, say, Canada came in and did that to us? And our government couldn't do shit? Wouldn't you launch insurgent attacks? Wouldn't you become racist against Canadians? Wouldn't your leaders make speechs attacking the Canadians?
Hey mate, Canada acts more subtle-like. It's called subversion, y'all might have heard of it, what with the CIA and all.

Damn, how'd that "y'all" slip in there? More American all the time...

Some very valid and valuable points. Though I find it interesting that Israel is the only nation in the area that's not a third world nation. If the Palestians and the Israelis could get along, the Palestinians would be better off than living in any other Arab nation
I don't think that most ME nations could be called third-world. They're not as rich as the west (though Israel is) but they're nowhere near the poverty of Africa.

the man on the street is at least as poor as central and south americans

I don't think that most ME nations could be called third-world. They're not as rich as the west (though Israel is) but they're nowhere near the poverty of Africa.

second-world, then?

second world are communist i think.

EDIT: specifically, the Soviet Union. the term mostly doesn't exist anymore.

Old world (europe, russia, ottomans); New World (Americas); Third World (everyone else).

The middle east is in the old world. Of course the nomeclature is inherently racist.

first second and third isnt old new etc or racist

the previous poster is right, 1st is the wealthy west, 2nd is communist block, third is the rest, the poor the tired the huddled masses

second world are communist i think.

EDIT: specifically, the Soviet Union. the term mostly doesn't exist anymore.

What? Commies could be first world. And i'd say North Korea is pretty damn third-y.

I think it's the "developing world" these days. And the developed world, of course.

first second and third isnt old new etc or racist

the previous poster is right, 1st is the wealthy west, 2nd is communist block, third is the rest, the poor the tired the huddled masses

I'm just telling you where third world comes from. Dress it up all you want by retconning it, doesn't alter how it came about.

It's like the ivy-league.

I think it's the "developing world" these days. And the developed world, of course.

Yes, that is correct. It's the preferred term.

US and them...

I'm just telling you where third world comes from. Dress it up all you want by retconning it, doesn't alter how it came about.

It's like the ivy-league.

by your logic then, france would be a third world nation. since the old and third are equated.

I found an essay written by King Abdullah of Jordan, dating back to 1947, a few months before the Arab-Israeli war.I think that people should consider reading this. Even if there are Arabs who hate the Jews on completely racist grounds that have nothing to do with this, the original resistance stemmed from this sudden influx of immigrants on a tiny land, no larger than Vermont, and the numbers were overwhelming.

If I recall, the Arabs lost a war, when you do that the winners can make you their bitch. Hell, look at post WW1 Germany. Or post WW2 Japan! Basically, when the brits won, they got the right to annex the territory, and they did... for a Jewish state. I don't see a problem with that.

If I recall, the Arabs lost a war, when you do that the winners can make you their bitch. Hell, look at post WW1 Germany. Or post WW2 Japan! Basically, when the brits won, they got the right to annex the territory, and they did... for a Jewish state. I don't see a problem with that.

you recall incorrectly. the TURKS lost a war.

the us also lost a war against vietnam... you givin up your right to vote to ho chi minh?

by your logic then, france would be a third world nation. since the old and third are equated.
no, old world is west of the Berlin Wall, so it is first world, along with the new world.

If I recall, the Arabs lost a war, when you do that the winners can make you their bitch. Hell, look at post WW1 Germany. Or post WW2 Japan! Basically, when the brits won, they got the right to annex the territory, and they did... for a Jewish state. I don't see a problem with that.

except that the Brits promised the land to both the Jews and the Arabs.

I'm just telling you where third world comes from. Dress it up all you want by retconning it, doesn't alter how it came about.

It's like the ivy-league.

Except that that has nothing to do with where it came from. Old World/New World and First World/Second World have nothing to do with eachother. If they did, the US would be part of the Second World, and whenever such terminology is used we're described as part of the First World. First, Second, and Third World were Cold War era distinctions: the capitalist west and japan, the communist soviet union, and the poor and undeveloped battleground the two fought their proxy battles in.

you recall incorrectly. the TURKS lost a war.

the us also lost a war against vietnam... you givin up your right to vote to ho chi minh?
the US didn't lose in Vietnam, they tied. And anyways, clearly not even close to the same situation, since the US was fighting in Vietnam, not in the US.

you recall incorrectly. the TURKS lost a war.

the us also lost a war against vietnam... you givin up your right to vote to ho chi minh?

We were never invaded. And my world history is rusty, sorry for that. Turkey should of been made a Jewish state.

except that the Brits promised the land to both the Jews and the Arabs.
Eh, I'm tired. Make Jeruselum an international city or a city state and annex Turkey is what they should of done.

I dont think many people know this but.... The Jewish people didn't really care of or wanted an official "Jewish State" back then.... in fact, they didnt even come up with the idea, english zionists did, the Jewish people were content with living in peace with Muslims in the holy land. Especially since Muslims have a policy of religious freedom.

If I recall, the Arabs lost a war, when you do that the winners can make you their bitch. Hell, look at post WW1 Germany. Or post WW2 Japan! Basically, when the brits won, they got the right to annex the territory, and they did... for a Jewish state. I don't see a problem with that.

And you win the fight for independence (as the Palestinians were pretty much about to) you get the right to run your own country. Except, of course, if someone else happens to get your independence for you.

I dont think many people know this but.... The Jewish people didn't really care of or wanted an official "Jewish State" back then.... in fact, they didnt even come up with the idea, english zionists did, the Jewish people were content with living in peace with Muslims in the holy land. Especially since Muslims have a policy of religious freedom.

only half right, Mizrahi Jews didnt want a state, many ashekenhazim did.

organizations like the Irgun predated wwii

except that the Brits promised the land to both the Jews and the Arabs.

And Israel was split of the Juden and the arabs, but then the arabs decided "fuck international resolutions", got the whole Muslim world together, and invaded Israel. Arabs lost, Israel won, and its been downhill for the arabs since them.

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAhhhhhhhhhhh....:(

Suck it up, bitches! You lost all 6 of your wars!:eek:

by your logic then, france would be a third world nation. since the old and third are equated.

No. France is in the old world and therefore a 'first world' nation. It's in chronological order of colonization.

The US is 'second', being 'new'. But americans are very label conscious, and since they never like to be thought of as 'second' they had to go muck the whole thing up and claim they were in the 'first'.

Just like people claim they went to an 'ivy' even though their school never played football with the right colleges.

orrrrr

you are just wrong about the origin
god knows i am a good bit of the time

orrrrr

what does this mean? are you choking? are you Godzilla?

yes

i am secretly godzilla.

i type on the most humongous keyboard ever. you should see it its totally awesome.


i got my computer desk at ikea. rodan sold it to me.

For the millionth time, c'mon, say it with me now:

After WWI, Palestine became under British rule. They gave some land to create Israel. The Palestinians were a non-issue.

ah yes that makes it fair. i see it so clearly now.


"men on an island a thousand miles away gave you this land? wow that was cool of them. should i pack up or did they give you my utensils and couches too?"

yes

i am secretly godzilla.

i type on the most humongous keyboard ever. you should see it its totally awesome.

i got my computer desk at ikea. rodan sold it to me.
no way, I don't believe you! good night :p

yes

i am secretly godzilla.

i type on the most humongous keyboard ever. you should see it its totally awesome.

i got my computer desk at ikea. rodan sold it to me.
no way, I don't believe you! rodan works at that other place... good night :p

only half right, Mizrahi Jews didnt want a state, many ashekenhazim did.

thats only coz the Ashkenazi didnt live in the middle east while the Mizrahi did, the Ashkenazi were always welcome just as long as they wouldn't cause trouble. The Muslims dont even mind.

And Israel was split of the Juden and the arabs, but then the arabs decided "fuck international resolutions", got the whole Muslim world together, and invaded Israel. Arabs lost, Israel won, and its been downhill for the arabs since them.

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAhhhhhhhhhhh....:(

Suck it up, bitches! You lost all 6 of your wars!:eek:

You get a :fluffle: for that :D

orrrrr

you are just wrong about the origin
god knows i am a good bit of the time

Quite possibly. However my explanation does make perfect sense.

it does sound good

You get a :fluffle: for that :D

Thank you. I try, plus I'm grumpy.

Eh, I'm tired. Make Jeruselum an international city or a city state and annex Turkey is what they should of done.
In the article I linked, (which I doubt many read), one of the things that King Abdullah points out is that after Medina and Mecca, Jersusalem is the third holiest city in Islam and doesn't think it should belong to a particular group, but rather to everyone.


May I also point out that Jerusalem is, after Mecca and Medina, the holiest place in Islam. In fact, in the early days of our religion, Moslems prayed toward Jerusalem instead of Mecca.

The Jewish "religious claim" to Palestine is as absurd as the "historic claim." The Holy Places, sacred to three great religions, must be open to all, the monopoly of none. Let us not confuse religion and politics.