Israel is interested in who actually owns land now? I believe there are entire camps of people who would be very happy to hear that.

Now they want to come back? What is it with those people?

This isn't really interesting. Sounds like someone is bored.

Did the Ironic tag become a refugee in Jordan?

That is shiatty but you gotta know as a jew in Egypt that you are on shaky ground even when Mubarak was there they used to clash over the Palestinians all the time.

Someone should have paid for a title inspection at closing -

Let me just say I'm thrilled that I don't live in a part of the world where ownership of anything can be "proven" via ancient holy text.

If only the Jews had access to some trial lawyers ...

balloot: Let me just say I'm thrilled that I don't live in a part of the world where ownership of anything can be "proven" via ancient holy text.

Well, in this case it was actual legal deeds from as far back as 1863. Still, though, not a group that is going to get a lot of sympathy over property rights.

Isn't he whole concept of "Jewish ownership" of anything racist?

That would fit on what? A floppy disk?

I have it on good authority(Israel) that the people and the state of Palestine never existed...

/So please ignore the death squads that proceed in front of the israeli settlers.
//the ancient European method was just to spread the plague to the indigenous peoples in the new land called chinaamericaindia.
///SARs was good recent try to get rid of the settlers in North America, but it failed.

GameSprocket: Well, in this case it was actual legal deeds from as far back as 1863. Still, though, not a group that is going to get a lot of sympathy over property rights

Do you think they'll claim a "Right to Return"?

balloot: Let me just say I'm thrilled that I don't live in a part of the world where ownership of anything can be "proven" via ancient holy text.

The article in question is about documents from the 1940's.

liam76: balloot: Let me just say I'm thrilled that I don't live in a part of the world where ownership of anything can be "proven" via ancient holy text.

The article in question is about documents from the 1940's.

The Israelis want to revert to the land ownership patterns of the 1940s?

Israel dropped the ball on this in 1948.

Instead of taking in the Jews who were thrown out of the Arab nations they should have let them sit in refugee camps in Egypt and JOrdan and Syria and Lebanon and Iraq and then used them as political pawns for the next 60 years. Taking them into their new nation, giving them citizenship and allowing them to rebuild their lives doesn't have any propaganda value at all.

Philip Francis Queeg: liam76: balloot: Let me just say I'm thrilled that I don't live in a part of the world where ownership of anything can be "proven" via ancient holy text.

The article in question is about documents from the 1940's.

The Israelis want to revert to the land ownership patterns of the 1940s?

Uhhh...if Jews are pretending pre-1940's land ownership means something, shouldn't they be calling up Germany?

Philip Francis Queeg: liam76: balloot: Let me just say I'm thrilled that I don't live in a part of the world where ownership of anything can be "proven" via ancient holy text.

The article in question is about documents from the 1940's.

The Israelis want to revert to the land ownership patterns of the 1940s?

Not at all, but keeping physical proof that they owned land in Cairo (or other parts of Egypt and the arab world for that matter) is an important bit of history.

I met peopel in Egypt who outright insisted that jews hadn't lived there for hundreds of years, or that they were only guests in the time and never actually owned any land.

And I'm sure we'll get our property back in Cuba as soon as Castro dies.

Face it folks, once a communist revolution seizes your property it stays seized. When the commies fall apart you probably won't get it back unless you're living in it.

sheep snorter: I have it on good authority(Israel) that the people and the state of Palestine never existed...

/So please ignore the death squads that proceed in front of the israeli settlers.
//the ancient European method was just to spread the plague to the indigenous peoples in the new land called chinaamericaindia.
///SARs was good recent try to get rid of the settlers in North America, but it failed.

When was there an actual state of Palestine? As in independent diplomatic recognition and exchange of envoys, issuing passports, an actual sitting head of state (King of the Palestinians, maybe)? Not part of a larger empire? Between Roman, Islamic/Ottoman and British Imperial control, that part of the world was controlled by outside powers for around 2000 years.

Yeah, there was Palestine, as part of the Ottoman Empire. When the Empire fell after World War I, it became British territory, assimilated into the British Empire. The British gave up a chunk of their holdings in the mideast during decolonialization to create Israel. Yeah, it sucks for the people who were there before and told that this was now somebody elses land, but it's a total fiction to say that they had their own independent country beforehand.

liam76: Philip Francis Queeg: liam76: balloot: Let me just say I'm thrilled that I don't live in a part of the world where ownership of anything can be "proven" via ancient holy text.

The article in question is about documents from the 1940's.

The Israelis want to revert to the land ownership patterns of the 1940s?

Not at all, but keeping physical proof that they owned land in Cairo (or other parts of Egypt and the arab world for that matter) is an important bit of history.

I met peopel in Egypt who outright insisted that jews hadn't lived there for hundreds of years, or that they were only guests in the time and never actually owned any land.

I've met people who claimed that Jerusalem is the indivisible capital of the Jewish state.

balloot: Philip Francis Queeg: liam76: balloot: Let me just say I'm thrilled that I don't live in a part of the world where ownership of anything can be "proven" via ancient holy text.

The article in question is about documents from the 1940's.

The Israelis want to revert to the land ownership patterns of the 1940s?

Uhhh...if Jews are pretending pre-1940's land ownership means something, shouldn't they be calling up Germany?

ALready did.

Philip Francis Queeg: liam76: Philip Francis Queeg: liam76: balloot: Let me just say I'm thrilled that I don't live in a part of the world where ownership of anything can be "proven" via ancient holy text.

The article in question is about documents from the 1940's.

The Israelis want to revert to the land ownership patterns of the 1940s?

Not at all, but keeping physical proof that they owned land in Cairo (or other parts of Egypt and the arab world for that matter) is an important bit of history.

I met peopel in Egypt who outright insisted that jews hadn't lived there for hundreds of years, or that they were only guests in the time and never actually owned any land.

I've met people who claimed that Jerusalem is the indivisible capital of the Jewish state.

Does that have any bearing on the importance of these papers?

Or is this another case of you being unable to participate in a thread about Israel without bringing random points with no relation to the topic at hand in an attempt to make Israel look bad?


wildcardjack: Face it folks, once a communist revolution seizes your property it stays seized.

I woudl say in any revolution, or war where your side "loses" your stuff stays seized.

After 70 years, I think the "finders keepers, losers weepers" rule is in full effect on this.

Silverstaff: sheep snorter: I have it on good authority(Israel) that the people and the state of Palestine never existed...

/So please ignore the death squads that proceed in front of the israeli settlers.
//the ancient European method was just to spread the plague to the indigenous peoples in the new land called chinaamericaindia.
///SARs was good recent try to get rid of the settlers in North America, but it failed.

When was there an actual state of Palestine? As in independent diplomatic recognition and exchange of envoys, issuing passports, an actual sitting head of state (King of the Palestinians, maybe)? Not part of a larger empire? Between Roman, Islamic/Ottoman and British Imperial control, that part of the world was controlled by outside powers for around 2000 years.

Yeah, there was Palestine, as part of the Ottoman Empire. When the Empire fell after World War I, it became British territory, assimilated into the British Empire. The British gave up a chunk of their holdings in the mideast during decolonialization to create Israel. Yeah, it sucks for the people who were there before and told that this was now somebody elses land, but it's a total fiction to say that they had their own independent country beforehand.

The Philistines (also mentioned in the bible) are the progenitors of the Palestinians. They also suffered through a diaspora of their own much like Israel.

stealing? don't they usually settle their disputes with UZIs and white phosphorus? i commend the jews for taking this step towards being civilized.

If Jews weren't currently occupying illegal settlements on stolen land I might give a shiat.

And the the Chosen Land Thieves and Genociders can suck it. Long and hard.

JesusJuice: If Jews weren't currently occupying illegal settlements on stolen land I might give a shiat.

If you're actually living in Seattle, there's quite a few disenfranchised aboriginals that would like a word with you regarding that statement, paleface...

willfullyobscure: JesusJuice: If Jews weren't currently occupying illegal settlements on stolen land I might give a shiat.

If you're actually living in Seattle, there's quite a few disenfranchised aboriginals that would like a word with you regarding that statement, paleface...

The difference being that aboriginals are not in fact disenfranchised but are instead full citizens with equal rights under the law.

Worked so well in Pale-- er, Israel, now let's give Egypt a try!

starsrift: Worked so well in Pale-- er, Israel, now let's give Egypt a try!

Did you not read the article? The Jews who lost their property in Egypt lost it after the formation of Israel.


JesusJuice: willfullyobscure: JesusJuice: If Jews weren't currently occupying illegal settlements on stolen land I might give a shiat.

If you're actually living in Seattle, there's quite a few disenfranchised aboriginals that would like a word with you regarding that statement, paleface...

The difference being that aboriginals are not in fact disenfranchised but are instead full citizens with equal rights under the law.

Not familiar with the Dakota War and the Sioux who fled afterwards are you?

How many full blooded Natives are on the Supreme court of the US?

liam76: starsrift: Worked so well in Pale-- er, Israel, now let's give Egypt a try!

Did you not read the article? The Jews who lost their property in Egypt lost it after the formation of Israel.

While that is technically correct, your statement as written seems to imply that the property in Egypt was lost because of the formation of Israel, not the Egyptian revolution in 1952.
In any event, I'm not exactly clear how this modifies my brusquely hyperbolic analogy of "property in [Egypt, Palestine/Israel] used to be ours way back when, so we have the rights to it now!".

Before you endeavour to enlighten me, I would advise you to consider that the quotient of seriousness in my statement was low, and should not be read into in great depth.

starsrift: While that is technically correct, your statement as written seems to imply that the property in Egypt was lost because of the formation of Israel, not the Egyptian revolution in 1952.

Without he formation of ISrael the jews would likely not have been driven out, and like most Egyptians would have not lost all their property.


starsrift:In any event, I'm not exactly clear how this modifies my brusquely hyperbolic analogy of "property in [Egypt, Palestine/Israel] used to be ours way back when, so we have the rights to it now!".

Before you endeavour to enlighten me, I would advise you to consider that the quotient of seriousness in my statement was low, and should not be read into in great depth

You never know in these threads.

I thought you were thinking that both cases were claims from hundreds of years ago, I see I was wrong.

liam76: starsrift: While that is technically correct, your statement as written seems to imply that the property in Egypt was lost because of the formation of Israel, not the Egyptian revolution in 1952.

Without the formation of Israel the jews would likely not have been driven out, and like most Egyptians would have not lost all their property.

The Copts also lost properties in the 1952 revolution as they were confiscated by the new Egyptian government. They had not formed a new state to flee to, and - also like the Jews who did not go to Israel - they fled to Western countries.

Unless you posit the formation of Israel as a principal cause behind the Egyptian revolution, your argument bears no merit and remains a non-sequitor. The history is thorny, and the elephant in the room has been joked about upthread, plenty. :/

starsrift: liam76: starsrift: While that is technically correct, your statement as written seems to imply that the property in Egypt was lost because of the formation of Israel, not the Egyptian revolution in 1952.

Without the formation of Israel the jews would likely not have been driven out, and like most Egyptians would have not lost all their property.

The Copts also lost properties in the 1952 revolution as they were confiscated by the new Egyptian government. They had not formed a new state to flee to, and - also like the Jews who did not go to Israel - they fled to Western countries.

So did Muslims.

starsrift: Unless you posit the formation of Israel as a principal cause behind the Egyptian revolution, your argument bears no merit and remains a non-sequitor. The history is thorny, and the elephant in the room has been joked about upthread, plenty

The Egyptian revolution wasn't the only reason they lost property.

The paper stated that the purpose of the smuggling attempt was to use the documents against Egypt in order to gain restitution for property that Jews lost when they were forced to flee Egypt.

Jews lost land when they were driven out from 1948-1967. There It isn't as if there was one land grab in 52. And if you really want to dig into it you can read about the 1945 pogroms in Cairo.
While that kind of hate for other religios groups has always been there in Egypt, you can't really think the complete driving out of Jews in Egypt has ntohing to do with Israel.

liam76: ...The Egyptian revolution wasn't the only reason they lost property.

The paper stated that the purpose of the smuggling attempt was to use the documents against Egypt in order to gain restitution for property that Jews lost when they were forced to flee Egypt...

Like I said, the history gets thorny. When you start to talk about this sort of restitution, it's becoming more reparations than restitution. Fleeing your property (abandoning it) - even if the reasons for fleeing are justified! - and having it confiscated by the state are different things.
Even in America, if you fled your property for a decade or more, tax arrears would mount and the property would be lost from your name, in time. That's assuming you're one of the lucky few that owns outright and isn't mortgaged. That's quite a bit different from the state using force or the threat of it to turn you onto the street so someone else can live in your home. The issue is far from simple, but the formation of Israel is irrelevant to it.

On a sadly continued serious note, to beat the horse killed upthread, my opinion would be fully for the absolute return of said property lost in the 40's-60's to the Jews in Egypt and reparations paid, conditional upon the same return of confiscated property and reparations paid to the Palestinian victims of the same time period.

starsrift: When you start to talk about this sort of restitution, it's becoming more reparations than restitution. Fleeing your property (abandoning it) - even if the reasons for fleeing are justified! - and having it confiscated by the state are different things.

I agree. I never argued for restitution. I don't think Israel's lawsuit would win, but I think it is important that people don't try and deny this happened.


starsrift: Even in America, if you fled your property for a decade or more, tax arrears would mount and the property would be lost from your name, in time. That's assuming you're one of the lucky few that owns outright and isn't mortgaged. That's quite a bit different from the state using force or the threat of it to turn you onto the street so someone else can live in your home. The issue is far from simple, but the formation of Israel is irrelevant to it.

If you look at the scale of pogroms, and the frequency of attacks after the formation of Israel I don't see how you can say that. In many of the cases the state was using force, or at least turning a blind eye to it.


starsrift: On a sadly continued serious note, to beat the horse killed upthread, my opinion would be fully for the absolute return of said property lost in the 40's-60's to the Jews in Egypt and reparations paid, conditional upon the same return of confiscated property and reparations paid to the Palestinian victims of the same time period

So if some jews get screwd by Egypt in the 40's-60's, your attitude is "no soup for you" until Palestenians get property and reparations?

That makes no sense. Say get over it, say it needs to be adressed, but it is BS to say that decisions for jews should be put on hold until issues between Israel and another group is resolved (and that is ignoring the "reperations" for Palestenians under Egypt and Jordan when HDI was much worse than under Israel)