"...Israel was founded on the dispossession of its original indiginous majority."?????
Reader comment on item: Further on Israel's Winning Its War
in response to reader comment: Maybe Jabotinsky isn't the best writer to quote

Submitted by bernard ross (Jamaica), Aug 16, 2006 at 12:21

I dont agree. The only indiginous peoples which were able to oust the arab colonisers who rose out of arabia and conquered north africa and parts of europe are the Jews. Arab and muslim culture has controlled musch of no. africa to the detriment of the original berbers. The fact that the arab colonisers were in place for over 1400 years is not a justification for denying the claims of the original inhabitants who were evicted from their lands by tthe baylonians and later the Europeans(romans).

Even basic law recognises that the receiver of stolen property cannot have more rights to the property than the original owner even if he purchased that property unknowingly. There is no people who have a greater right to the land of Israel than the jews. The descendants of the receivors of the stolen property not withstanding. Everyone should recognise the obvious connection of the descendants of ancient Israel to the land of Israel. The basis of muslim and christian culture, the old testament, recognises that link.

The name "Palestine" was invented by the romans from Europe. The fact that the hebrew culture was kept alive in exile for 2000 years until the return is witness to the obvious link that requires no further evidence. A people banished to slavery in foreign lands is returning and those who received the stolen property are suffering displacement but they can live in the homes of the jews who were thrown out of muslim lands.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.