Were Palestinians expelled or fled?

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Speaking of the Hebron massacre, check out this conversation between the Mayor of Hebron and a member of one of those old Jewish families of Hebron (they are chatting in Hebrew, but there is a translation of their remarks below):

Hebron – Ma’an – An elderly Jewish man from Hebron has asked the city's mayor to permit his burial in a Muslim cemetery when he dies, insisting that his body not be placed in one of the sites now controlled by Israeli settlers.

Haim Bajayo, 75, visited Mayor Khalid Al-Useili at his office in the southern West Bank city and described in detail how Jews and Arabs had generally enjoyed amiable relations until the arrival of tens of thousands of foreign immigrants from the 1920s until 1948, the year Israel was established and most of Hebron's Jews fled to the new state established in their name.

Bajayo was born in Hebron in 1935 and grew up in its Daboya neighborhood with his family, which owned a home there and held official property documents until 1977. A decade after Israel seized control of the Palestinian city and began permitting its citizens to settle there, Bajayo ceremoniously ceded his home for the benefit of the Palestinian municipality. The mayor at that time was Fahd Al-Qawasmi.

"As long as [the settlers] are in Hebron, there is no chance of reaching an agreement" to end the six-decade conflict, he told the mayor. "I don't want any of my property or my house back as long as Palestinian homes and lands are not returned. The same day the Palestinians regain what was taken from them in 1948, I'll come to you and say, 'I have a house ... registered in the real estate department.'"

In footage of his recent meeting with Al-Useili, obtained by Ma'an, Bajayo recalls the history of his family, which moved from Spain to Morocco before settling in Egypt. His grandfather moved to Palestine and lived in Hebron. Bajayo's family witnessed the 1929 massacre of Hebron's Jews. “If the Abu Haykal family hadn't protected my grandfather at the time, I wouldn't have been born,” he said.

At this point in the film, the mayor interrupts Bajayo insisting that a British Mandate officer was responsible for the massacre, contrary to the Israeli narrative which tends to blame only Palestinians for the bloodshed. Bajayo affirmed the mayor’s comment, according to what he heard from his father and grandfather, who told him the Jews and Palestinians in Hebron once treated each other as neighbors.

Bajayo went on to tell the mayor that he vehemently opposed the occupation of Palestinian homes in Hebron by Israeli settlers. “Settlers are an obstacle to peace and the Palestinians must attain their rights and return to their homes and lands occupied in 1948. After the Palestinians return to Hebron, I can return to my grandfather’s home in the city,” he explained.

The meeting ended with Bajayo requesting that after death his body be buried in a Muslim cemetery in a show of respect to the history of his family which once lived in peace with its Arab neighbors in the city. "I want to be buried in Hebron. I won't go to a Jewish cemetery at any rate, because it's under the settlers' control. I'm requesting a modest burial spot in a Muslim cemetery," he explains.

For his part, the mayor welcomed Bajayo home. "Haim, you are always welcome," Al-Useili says in the video. "Not as a guest, but as an authentic Hebron citizen. This is an honor for us."

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=294067

[mawilson 2,133]

Another very interesting piece is "FDR Meets Ibn Saud" by William A. Eddy. The two leaders met secretly in 1945 and discussed Palestine and the question of a Jewish homeland there.

You can read it online:

http://www.ameu.org/uploads/FDR_IBNSAUD_2005.pdf

The very first paragraph of this masterpiece sounds like the author has a hard-on for the King of Saud.

THE KING OF SAUDI ARABIA, WHO SIGNED HIMSELF

“Abdul Aziz Al Saud” but who has come to be known as “Ibn Saud,”

was one of the great men of the twentieth century. He won

his kingdom and united his people by his personal leadership.

He possessed those epic qualities of the leader which Samuel

recognized in Saul;* he excelled in the common tasks which all

must perform. He was taller, his shoulders were broader, he

was a better hunter, a braver warrior, more skillful in wielding

a knife whether in personal combat or in skinning a sheep, he

excelled in following the tracks of camels and finding his way

in the desert. In him his subjects saw their own lives in heroic

size, and therefore they made him their king.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

The very first paragraph of this masterpiece sounds like the author has a hard-on for the King of Saud.

Maybe. But he was a witness to the historic meeting, and his account is historically valuable.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

After discussing the progress of the war, and expressing his confidence that Germany would be defeated, F.D.R. stated that he had a serious problem in which he desired the King’s advice and help; namely, the rescue and rehabilitation of the remnant of Jews in Central Europe who had suffered indescribable horrors at the hands of the Nazis: eviction, destruction of their homes, torture and mass-murder. He, F.D.R., felt a personal responsibility and indeed had committed himself to help solve this problem. What could the King suggest?

Ibn Saud’s reply was prompt and laconic: “Give them and their descendants the choicest lands and homes of the Germans who had oppressed them.”

F.D.R. replied that the Jewish survivors have a sentimental desire to settle in Palestine and, quite understandably, would dread remaining in Germany where they might suffer again.

The King said that he had no doubt the Jews have good reason not to trust the Germans, but surely the Allies will destroy Nazi power forever and in their victory will be strong enough to protect Nazi victims. If the Allies do not expect firmly to control future German policy, why fight this costly war? He, Ibn Saud, could not conceive of leaving an enemy in a position to strike back after defeat.

In a few minutes, F.D.R. returned to the attack, saying that he counted on Arab hospitality and on the King’s help in solving the problem of Zionism, but the King repeated: “Make the enemy and the oppressor pay; that is how we Arabs wage war. Amends should be made by the criminal, not by the innocent bystander. What injury have Arabs done to the Jews of Europe? It is the ‘Christian’ Germans who stole their homes and lives. Let the Germans pay.” Once more, F.D.R. returned to the subject, complaining that the King had not helped him at all with his problem, but the King, having lost some patience, did not expound his views again, beyond stating (with a note of irony in his voice) that this over-solicitude for the Germans was incomprehensible to an uneducated bedouin with whom friends get more consideration than enemies. The King’s final remark on the subject was to the effect that it is Arab custom to distribute survivors and victims of battle among the victorious tribes in accordance with their number and their supplies of food and water. In the Allied camp there are fifty countries, among whom Palestine is small, land-poor and has already been assigned more than its quota of European refugees.

...

The President then gave Ibn Saud the double assurance, repeated just one week before his death in his letter to Ibn Saud, dated April 5, 1945: (1) He personally, as president, would never do anything which might prove hostile to the Arabs; and (2) the U. S. Government would make no change in its basic policy in Palestine without full and prior consultation with both Jews and Arabs.* To the King, these oral assurances were equal to an alliance; he did not foresee that Death was waiting in the wings to bear the speaker away before the promises could be redeemed.

pp. 32-34, FDR Meets Ibn Saud

[mawilson 2,133]

Maybe. But he was a witness to the historic meeting, and his account is historically valuable.

I agree, just a little strange for a United States Marine Corps colonel, that's all.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

I agree, just a little strange for a United States Marine Corps colonel, that's all.

Eddy had an interesting life. He was born and grew up in the Middle East (the son of British missionaries,) spoke Arabic since childhood, and had long experience with Arab customs. He spent much of his life there, and died there. So his view was not that of an outsider, but that of someone who was equally comfortable in both Western and Arab culture. Eddy's expertise played a major role in building the business relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia, which has continued to this day.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Eddy had an interesting life. He was born and grew up in the Middle East (the son of British American missionaries,) spoke Arabic since childhood, and had long experience with Arab customs. He spent much of his life there, and died there. So his view was not that of an outsider, but that of someone who was equally comfortable in both Western and Arab culture. Eddy's expertise played a major role in building the business relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia, which has continued to this day.

Correction.

[Captain Oates 911]

I apologize as I thought it was Tel aviv and should have looked it up. I was reading an older book last week where it said that the end of times would come when Jerusalem would become the Capital and the Temple was rebuilt.

The end of times will come when American Politicians stop dying their hair and whitening their teeth - so we have some billions of years left yet

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The end of times will come when American Politicians stop dying their hair and whitening their teeth - so we have some billions of years left yet

We left powdered wigs and tea stained teeth behind us.

[Captain Oates 911]

We left powdered wigs and tea stained teeth behind us.

Liberace ?

Edited September 8, 2011 by Alan the Red

[Dan and Judy 614]

The very first paragraph of this masterpiece sounds like the author has a hard-on for the King of Saud.

I got hard just reading it , but reading on there wasn't much there.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

but reading on there wasn't much there.

I bet it was this part that chapped your azz:

“Make the enemy and the oppressor pay; that is how we Arabs wage war. Amends should be made by the criminal, not by the innocent bystander. What injury have Arabs done to the Jews of Europe? It is the ‘Christian’ Germans who stole their homes and lives. Let the Germans pay.”

[Dan and Judy 614]

This is the heart of the story

jjjjAfter discussing the progress of the war, and expressing his

confidence that Germany would be defeated, F.D.R. stated that

he had a serious problem in which he desired the King's advice

and help; namely, the rescue and rehabilitation of the remnant

of Jews in Central Europe who had suffered indescribable

horrors at the hands of the Nazis: eviction, destruction of their

homes, torture and mass-murder. He, F.D.R., felt a personal

responsibility and indeed had committed himself to help solve

this problem. What could the King suggest?

Ibn Saud's reply was prompt and laconic: "Give them and

their descendants the choicest lands and homes of the Germans

who had oppressed them."

F.D.R. replied that the Jewish survivors have a sentimental

desire to settle in Palestine and, quite understandably, would

dread remaining in Germany where they might suffer again.

The King said that he had no doubt the Jews have good

reason not to trust the Germans, but surely the Allies will

destroy Nazi power forever and in their victory will be strong

enough to protect Nazi victims. If the Allies do not expect

firmly to control future German policy, why fight this costly

war? He, Ibn Saud, could not conceive of leaving an enemy in

a position to strike back after defeat.

In a few minutes, F.D.R. returned to the attack, saying that

he counted on Arab hospitality and on the King's help in solving

the problem of Zionism, but the King repeated: "Make the

enemy and the oppressor pay; that is how we Arabs wage war.

Amends should be made by the criminal, not by the innocent

bystander. What injury have Arabs done to the Jews of Europe?

It is the 'Christian' Germans who stole their homes and lives.

Let the Germans pay." Once more, F.D.R. returned to the

subject, complaining that the King had not helped him at all

with his problem, but the King, having lost some patience,

Quite simply FDR was trying to smooze this guy into going along with the Jews settling in Palestine.

Saud said "Homey don't play that"

It's not like he changed FDR's mind about what should happen with a logical argument.

Then the Pres, released this meaningless double talk that promised nothing except consultation

The President then gave Ibn Saud the double assurance,

repeated just one week before his death in his letter to Ibn

Saud, dated April 5, 1945: (1) He personally, as president,

would never do anything which might prove hostile to the

Arabs; and (2) the U. S. Government would make no change

34

The Conference

in its basic policy in Palestine without full and prior

consultation with both Jews and Arabs.*

Edited September 9, 2011 by Dan and Judy

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Quite simply FDR was trying to smooze this guy into going along with the Jews settling in Palestine.

Saud said "Homey don't play that"

Exactly. And the Saudi king made the completely logical and reasonable argument that criminals should be the ones who are punished for their crimes, not innocent people who had nothing to do with those crimes.

It's not like he changed FDR's mind about what should happen with a logical argument.

Then the Pres, released this meaningless double talk that promised nothing except consultation

This one is harder to assess, as FDR died so soon afterwards. No real way to know what FDR had decided.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Exactly. And the Saudi king made the completely logical and reasonable argument that criminals should be the ones who are punished for their crimes, not innocent people who had nothing to do with those crimes.

This one is harder to assess, as FDR died so soon afterwards. No real way to know what FDR had decided.

If the movie Exodus is to be believed, we can assume the British were not about to allow the Jewish refugees to flee to Palestine, nor were the other Allied nations willing to assist them in establishing a homeland. The assumption was that they would return to their former places of residence, and take their chances along with the other displaced war survivors.