Jump to content

Talk:Sea of Galilee

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 71.59.215.201 (talk) at 23:38, 6 October 2007 (→panorama: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:V0.5 Theres barely any mention of Palestinians in the opening. "Israelites love them". This makes me sick. Palestinian blood fertilizes that land, and it's not a cute tourist spot for white western thill seekers to get a tan. Its a stolen land, with foreign settlers living on it. It's a warzone.

After the Jewish revolt, the area was continuously settled, primarily by Palestinian Arabs.

  1. What Jewish revolt? We need context.
  2. Why is the area primarily settled by Palestinian Arabs? What happened to the Jews? -- Zoe

I removed the sentence. There were two Jewish revolts: in 70, which led to the destruction of the Temple, and 132-135 (Bar Kochba), which destroye any plans for regaining Jewish sovereignty. Nevertheless, Jews continued living in the country, particularly in the area around the Sea of Galilee. In fact, the Mishnah and later the Jerusalem Talmud were written there in the fourth and fifth centuries. The Arab conquest was in the seventh century, so it is incorrect to assume that Arabs predominated there prior to that. If anything, the sentence is just an attempt at politicizing. Danny

Modern Times BOOGAH BOOGAF RET

In 1923 an agreement between Britain and France established the border between the British Mandate of Palestine and the French Mandate of Syria and put the entire lake area, including a 10-meter wide strip along the northeastern shore, within the territory of Palestine. From 1948 to 1967, the lake's northeastern shore was occupied by Syria, which captured it in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The 1947 UN Partition Plan put this territory area inside the Jewish state, but it wasn't until 1967, as a result of the Six Day War, that the entire Sea of Galilee came under Israeli control.

Someone please check this for accuracy. It was difficult to decipher what this paragraph was saying, but this is the best I could make out of what was there. Cbarbry 06:58, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This source seems to confirm it. It's an article published by the Council for the Advancement of Arab-British Understanding, and it appeared in a print magazine before it was published online. I see no reason why the CAABU would want to put out false info on Anglo-French treaties, so I am assuming it is accurate. {{user:Fishal|Fishal]]

Syria?

Read the article, please.

The border was re-drawn so that both sides of the Jordan river and the whole of the Sea of Galilee, including a 10-meter wide strip along the northeastern shore, were made a part of Palestine[1] (http://www.caabu.org/press/focus/gee.html). The 1947 UN Partition Plan put this territory area inside the Jewish state.

Thanks. Jayjg (talk) 04:44, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Syria occupied the north-eastern shore in 1948 and still claims it. Officially, the north-eastern shore is part of the Golan Heights. As per consensus on that article, all geography categories were included.Yuber(talk) 04:51, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so it was Syrian occupied land, not Israeli occupied. Please stop inserting the opposite, it can't possibly be part of the "occupied" Golan Heights, since it was never legally part of Syria to begin with. Jayjg (talk) 04:59, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just as the Israeli-occupied golan heights are listed under Geography of Syria, so must Lake tiberias be. Putting occupied in scare quotes isn't appreciated either, thanks.Yuber(talk) 05:02, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Your argument makes no sense; the Sea of Galilee isn't in the Golan Heights, there is no "Syrian part of it", and isn't occupied any more, though Syria occupied part of it for almost 30 years. As for the Golan Heights, they are annexed, which makes their "occupied" status a matter of controversy. Jayjg (talk) 17:20, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yuber, the top section deals with Geography; as such, it doesn't discuss anyone's claim to the Sea. The last section deals with politics. Please try to keep relevant information in relevant spots, rather than simply inserting POV as prominently as you possibly can. Remember, the purpose here is to write a NPOV encyclopedia, not forward your political agenda. Thanks. Jayjg (talk) 23:38, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your political agenda is already on the top by saying that it is "Israel's largest freshwater lake" with no mention of Syria.Yuber(talk) 23:38, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Please try to recall that I didn't write this article. Now, the fact that it is Israel's largest freshwater lake is a geographical fact, is it not? However, Syria's claim is a purely political one. I urge you again to show good faith by reverting yourself in order to make changes based on their value to the article, rather than on promoting your political position. Jayjg (talk) 23:44, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not denying that it is Israel's largest freshwater lake, that is an indisputable fact. What I am saying is that Syria also claims the northeastern portion of the lake and that according to the map on this page and maps by the CIA the northeastern portion of lake is in the occupied Golan Heights.Yuber(talk) 23:46, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Israel only has cease fire or armistice lines in this region. Without a peace treaty there's no reason to conclude that it is Israel's lake. It didn't belong to the French, British, League of Nations, or the UN. The Hague Convention took effect in 1910. It legally precluded the occupying powers - including the Mandates - from expropriating occupied territory. --Harlan

And the article already describes that claim clearly, and always has, in the long section outlining various political claims to the territory. Again, the opening section discusses geographical fact, the bottom section discusses political claims. For some reason you have felt the need to take one specific claim from the political section on bottom and insert it up top, in basically the first section. This will look very bad for you when these edits are inevitable examined during an RfC or RfAR, as they demonstrate a continuing pattern of POV editing and a preference for obstructionism and revert-warring over NPOV editing. I urge you to show a break from this pattern, and demonstrate a new regard for the NPOV policy on both this article and others like Jizyah. I'm telling you this for the good of Wikipedia, in a desire to help you become a positive contributor, and in a desire to help you avoid future conflict and potential sanctions. Jayjg (talk) 00:01, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with what Jayjg wrote (except the typos). BTW, what Syria claims deserves another article. Read "The Greater Syria: a History of Ambition" an old (1985 I think) book by Daniel Pipes. ←Humus sapiens←Talk 17:10, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried to fix the typos. :-) And it is hard to understand what value the "it belongs up here" revert comment added, especially when there was nothing on the Talk: page that substantiated that. Jayjg (talk) 17:45, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I dont really care to read any of Daniel Pipe's bullshit, so let's focus on the fact that the northeastern shore of the Sea of Galilee is in the Golan Heights, okay?Yuber(talk) 02:30, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Instead, let's focus on why you insist on putting political POV up front in a section that is purely geographical. Jayjg (talk) 03:36, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Saying it's Israel's largest freshwater lake with no mention of Syria is not purely geographical and you know this. Yuber(talk) 05:47, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it is and you know it. In any event, inserting your inaccurate POV at the top of the article can't help, regardless of your objections to what is already there. Jayjg (talk) 06:08, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Daniel Pipes is one of your sources - tell me it isn't so! You have to stop making believe that you are an unbiased source of information - this is getting to be funny. Anything to do with Israel is so slanted in wikipedia that a person starts to think that this may be the entire purpose of the entire site.

========================================================================

The whole of the Galilee panhandle was part of Syria until it was annexed into the newly formed British Mandate for Palestine. In the early 1800s, under Ottoman control, the Districts of Acre and Nablus were created, and added as subdivisions (sanjaks) to the Ottoman Province of Syria.

In 1920, France created the modern state of "Lebanon" by annexing onto the Turkish Vilayet of Beirut Syria three Sanjaks (districts). They were taken from the Turkish Vilayet of Damascus Syria -- namedly Tripoli and the north, Sidon and the south, and the Bekaa valley in the east. Up until that time the Vilayet of Beirut had governed the Sanjak of Nablus (from Jaffa to Jenin), and the Sanjak of Acre (from Jenin to Naqura). "Syrians", or whatever they were called, had been fishing this lake for centuries before there was any dispute over the Golan.

Y-chromosome studies indicate that many Syrians, Lebanese, Palestinians, and Jews share a common male ancestor (within the last 1300 years). One study concluded that "Palestinian-Jewish rivalry is based on cultural and religious, but not genetic, differences." harlan 07:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Golan status

The Golan Heights are simply not part of Israel, since Israel has not formally annexed them. From Golan Heights#Current status:

When Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin was asked in the Knesset why he was risking international criticism for this annexation, he replied "You use the word annexation, but I am not using it."[1] The governmental Jewish Agency for Israel states that "Although reported as a annexation, it is not: the Golan Heights are not declared to be Israeli territory."[2]

This is not to say that they're part of Syria either. Accordingly I have put that the Sea of Galilee is "between Israel and the Golan Heights". Perhaps this could be made even more neutral with a phrase such as "Israel proper" or somesuch. —Ashley Y 08:23, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not let politics cloud sensible and plain writing. The Sea of Galilee is Israel's largest freshwater lake. Israel completely controls it, as it always has, even during the time Syria occupied part of the shoreline. Jayjg (talk) 14:36, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a matter of control, it's a matter of location. There, I've put in a note for its location that doesn't claim the lake itself is not Israel. —Ashley Y 18:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
there are two maps in the article clearly showing the location. Putting golan heights in lead sentence seems confusing and giving it undue weight. It's also not physically accurate, there's a narrow line between the geological golan heights and the kineret, so it doesn't border it, nor did it according to the 1947 partition plan. In other words, Kineret has nothing to do with Golan Heights... it's two different things. It's bad enough golan heights article is under attack, this place is just Israel according also to all international law spheres (the International Law doesn't put the sea shore of the lake in Syria NOR does it border with the golan - According to international law line, Israel should control the eastern shore completely). Amoruso 07:10, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK. —Ashley Y 07:21, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE HILLY PLEATU OVERLOOKING THIS SEA AND JORDAN RIVER????????????????????????????????????

panorama

wow the panorama is neat

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sea_of_Galilee&oldid=162759494"